Chin J Dent Res. 2021 Jun 23;24(2):119-124. doi: 10.3290/j.cjdr.b1530491.
To evaluate the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to a lithium disilicate glass ceramic conditioned with different surface treatment procedures.
Crystallised slices of lithium disilicate glass ceramic were randomly divided into five groups (n = 10) according to different surface treatment procedures: the no surface treatment (NT) group was untreated; the hydrofluoric acid (HF) group was conditioned with 4.5% HF; the silane (S) group was conditioned with a silane coupling agent; the hydrofluoric acid and silane (HFS) group was conditioned with HF followed by the silane coupling agent; and the Monobond Etch & Prime (MEP) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) group was conditioned with the one-step self-etching primer MEP. Resin cement was applied to the ceramic surfaces and irradiated. A μSBS test was performed. Failure analysis, surface roughness tests, surface topography examination and elemental analysis were also conducted. The data were analysed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey honestly significant difference test (P < 0.05).
The MEP group resulted in comparable μSBS to the HFS group (16.9 ± 4.3 MPa and 16.0 ± 2.2 MPa, respectively), but a significantly higher μSBS than the NT (1.0 ± 0.9 MPa), HF (8.9 ± 3.9 MPa) and S (12.6 ± 2.5 MPa) groups. Adhesive failure was mainly observed in the NT and HF groups, while the S, HFS and MEP groups demonstrated the most mixed failure. Though micrographs revealed a roughened surface in the HF group, no significant difference was found with any other groups.
Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the μSBS of resin cement to lithium disilicate glass ceramic etched with MEP is as efficient as that treated with HF and silane.
评估不同表面处理程序对锂硅玻璃陶瓷的微剪切粘结强度(μSBS)的影响。
将结晶的锂硅玻璃陶瓷切片随机分为 5 组(n=10),根据不同的表面处理程序:未处理的(NT)组、用 4.5%氢氟酸(HF)处理的(HF)组、用硅烷偶联剂处理的(S)组、先用 HF 处理再用硅烷偶联剂处理的(HFS)组、以及用单步自酸蚀粘结剂 MEP 处理的(MEP)组。将树脂粘结剂应用于陶瓷表面并进行照射。进行 μSBS 测试。还进行了失效分析、表面粗糙度测试、表面形貌检查和元素分析。数据采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和 Tukey Honestly Significant Difference 检验(P < 0.05)进行分析。
MEP 组的 μSBS 与 HFS 组相当(分别为 16.9 ± 4.3 MPa 和 16.0 ± 2.2 MPa),但明显高于 NT(1.0 ± 0.9 MPa)、HF(8.9 ± 3.9 MPa)和 S(12.6 ± 2.5 MPa)组。NT 和 HF 组主要观察到粘结失效,而 S、HFS 和 MEP 组则主要表现为混合失效。虽然显微镜照片显示 HF 组表面粗糙,但与其他组无显著差异。
在本研究的限制范围内,可以得出结论,用 MEP 蚀刻的锂硅玻璃陶瓷的树脂粘结剂的 μSBS 与 HF 和硅烷处理的一样有效。