Suppr超能文献

表面处理方案对CAD/CAM氧化锆增强硅酸锂陶瓷可修复性的影响

Influence of Surface Conditioning Protocols on Reparability of CAD/CAM Zirconia-reinforced Lithium Silicate Ceramic.

作者信息

Al-Thagafi Rana, Al-Zordk Walid, Saker Samah

出版信息

J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(2):135-41. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a35909.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To test the effect of surface conditioning protocols on the reparability of CAD/CAM zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic compared to lithium-disilicate glass ceramic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (Vita Suprinity) and lithium disilicate glass-ceramic blocks (IPS e.max CAD) were categorized into four groups based on the surface conditioning protocol used. Group C: no treatment (control); group HF: 5% hydrofluoric acid etching for 60 s, silane (Monobond-S) application for 60 s, air drying; group HF-H: 5% HF acid etching for 60 s, application of silane for 60 s, air drying, application of Heliobond, light curing for 20 s; group CO: sandblasting with CoJet sand followed by silanization. Composite resin (Tetric EvoCeram) was built up into 4 x 6 x 3 mm blocks using teflon molds. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling (5000x, 5°C to 55°C). The microtensile bond strength test was employed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. SEM was employed for evaluation of all the debonded microbars, the failure type was categorized as either adhesive (failure at adhesive layer), cohesive (failure at ceramic or composite resin), or mixed (failure between adhesive layer and substrate). Two-way ANOVA and the Tukey's HSD post-hoc test were applied to test for significant differences in bond strength values in relation to different materials and surface pretreatment (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The highest microtensile repair bond strength for Vita Suprinity was reported in group CO (33.1 ± 2.4 MPa) and the lowest in group HF (27.4 ± 4.4 MPa). Regarding IPS e.max CAD, group CO showed the highest (30.5 ± 4.9 MPa) and HF the lowest microtensile bond strength (22.4 ± 5.7 MPa). Groups HF, HF-H, and CO showed statistically significant differences in terms of all ceramic types used (p < 0.05). The control group showed exclusively adhesive failures, while in HF, HF-H, and CO groups, mixed failures were predominant.

CONCLUSIONS

Repair bond strength to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramics and lithium-disilicate glass ceramic could be improved when ceramic surfaces are sandblasted with CoJet sand followed by silanization.

摘要

目的

与二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷相比,测试表面处理方案对CAD/CAM氧化锆增强硅酸锂陶瓷可修复性的影响。

材料与方法

根据所使用的表面处理方案,将氧化锆增强硅酸锂陶瓷(Vita Suprinity)和二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷块(IPS e.max CAD)分为四组。C组:不处理(对照);HF组:5%氢氟酸蚀刻60秒,应用硅烷(Monobond-S)60秒,空气干燥;HF-H组:5%氢氟酸蚀刻60秒,应用硅烷60秒,空气干燥,应用Heliobond,光固化20秒;CO组:用CoJet砂喷砂后进行硅烷化处理。使用聚四氟乙烯模具将复合树脂(Tetric EvoCeram)制成4×6×3毫米的块体。所有试样均进行热循环(5000次,5°C至55°C)。以1毫米/分钟的十字头速度进行微拉伸粘结强度测试。采用扫描电子显微镜对所有脱粘的微棒进行评估,失效类型分为粘结性(在粘结层失效)、内聚性(在陶瓷或复合树脂中失效)或混合性(在粘结层和基材之间失效)。应用双向方差分析和Tukey's HSD事后检验来测试不同材料和表面预处理对粘结强度值的显著差异(p<0.05)。

结果

Vita Suprinity的最高微拉伸修复粘结强度在CO组(33.1±2.4兆帕),最低在HF组(27.4±4.4兆帕)。对于IPS e.max CAD,CO组显示最高(30.5±4.9兆帕),HF组微拉伸粘结强度最低(22.4±5.7兆帕)。HF组、HF-H组和CO组在所使用的所有陶瓷类型方面均显示出统计学上的显著差异(p<0.05)。对照组仅出现粘结性失效,而在HF组、HF-H组和CO组中,混合性失效占主导。

结论

当陶瓷表面先用CoJet砂喷砂然后进行硅烷化处理时,与氧化锆增强硅酸锂陶瓷和二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷的修复粘结强度可以提高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验