Guimarães Heloísa A B, Cardoso Paula C, Decurcio Rafael A, Monteiro Lúcio J E, de Almeida Letícia N, Martins Wellington F, Magalhães Ana Paula R
Restorative Dentistry, Brazilian Dental Association, Goiânia 74325-110, Brazil.
Int J Biomater. 2018 Dec 31;2018:2598073. doi: 10.1155/2018/2598073. eCollection 2018.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of resin cement and lithium disilicate ceramic after various surface treatments of the ceramic. Sixty blocks of ceramic (IPS e.max Press, Ivoclar Vivadent) were obtained. After cleaning, they were placed in polyvinyl chloride tubes with acrylic resin. The blocks were divided into six groups (n=10) depending on surface treatment: H/S/A - 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane + Adhesive, H/S -10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane, H/S/UA - 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane + Universal Adhesive, H/UA- 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Universal Adhesive, MBEP/A - Monobond Etch & Prime + Adhesive, and MBEP - Monobond Etch & Prime. The light-cured resin cement (Variolink Esthetic LC, Ivoclar Vivadent) was inserted in a mold placed over the treated area of the ceramics and photocured with an LED for 20 s to produce cylinders (3 mm x 3 mm). The samples were subjected to a shear bond strength test in a universal test machine (Instron 5965) by 0.5 mm/min. ANOVA and Tukey tests showed a statistically significant difference between groups (p<0.05). The results of the shear strength test were H/S/A (9.61±2.50), H/S (10.22±3.28), H/S/UA (7.39±2.02), H/UA (4.28±1.32), MBEP/A (9.01±1.97), and MBEP (6.18±2.75). The H/S group showed cohesive failures, and the H/UA group was the only one that presented adhesive failures. The conventional treatment with hydrofluoric acid and silane showed the best bond strength. The use of a new ceramic primer associated with adhesive bonding obtained similar results to conventional surface treatment, being a satisfactory alternative to replace the use of hydrofluoric acid.
本研究的目的是评估在对锂二硅酸盐陶瓷进行各种表面处理后，树脂水门汀与该陶瓷之间的剪切粘结强度。获取了60块陶瓷（义获嘉e.max Press，义获嘉伟瓦登特公司）。清洁后，将它们置于装有丙烯酸树脂的聚氯乙烯管中。根据表面处理方式，将这些陶瓷块分为六组（n = 10）：H/S/A - 10%氢氟酸+硅烷+粘结剂，H/S - 10%氢氟酸+硅烷，H/S/UA - 10%氢氟酸+硅烷+通用粘结剂，H/UA - 10%氢氟酸+通用粘结剂，MBEP/A - 单键蚀刻与底涂剂+粘结剂，以及MBEP - 单键蚀刻与底涂剂。将光固化树脂水门汀（Variolink Esthetic LC，义获嘉伟瓦登特公司）注入放置在陶瓷处理区域上方的模具中，并用LED光固化20秒以制作圆柱体（3毫米×3毫米）。通过万能试验机（英斯特朗5965）以0.5毫米/分钟的速度对样品进行剪切粘结强度测试。方差分析和Tukey检验显示组间存在统计学显著差异（p<0.05）。剪切强度测试结果为：H/S/A（9.61±2.50），H/S（10.22±3.28），H/S/UA（7.39±2.02），H/UA（4.28±1.32），MBEP/A（9.01±1.97），以及MBEP（6.18±2.75）。H/S组出现内聚破坏，而H/UA组是唯一出现粘结破坏的组。氢氟酸和硅烷的传统处理方式显示出最佳的粘结强度。使用与粘结结合相关的新型陶瓷底涂剂获得了与传统表面处理相似的结果，是替代使用氢氟酸的一种令人满意的选择。
