Department of Operative Dentistry, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Frankfurt D-60598, Germany.
Department of Operative Dentistry, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Frankfurt D-60598, Germany.
Dent Mater. 2022 Jul;38(7):1140-1148. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2022.05.003. Epub 2022 Jun 4.
This study aimed to investigate the influence of the respective mechanical and chemical pre-treatments on the composite repair of a CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using a microtensile bond strength test (μTBS).
15 CAD/CAM Blocks of Vita Enamic (VE) were randomly sectioned into three mechanical pre-treatments: (1.) Diamond bur (D), (2.) Airborne abrasion (A), (3.) Tribochemical silica coating (T) and subsequently five chemical pre-treatments: (1.) Clearfil SE Bond Bond (B; negative control), (2.) ESPE Sil (S), (3.) Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus (CPP), (4.) Clearfil Repair (CR) and (5.) Scotchbond Universal (SCB). Per block, n = 20 specimens were sawn. Half of the specimens were randomly selected and subjected to an immediate bond strength test, while the other half was subjected to artificial aging for 6 months 180 days at 37 °C and subsequent thermocycling of 5000 cycles. A μTBS was performed and data (MPa) were compared in one-way and two-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD. Paired-t-test was used for artificial aging (α = 0.05). Debonded specimens were analyzed of for failure modes with a stereomicroscope (SEM).
The results of one-way ANOVA for the fifteen fastening procedures after aging indicated significant differences according to SCB-A and CPP-T. Two-way ANOVA after aging observed inferior bond strength for SCB. No differences were observed for mechanical pre-treatments. Artificial aging showed a significant reduction in bond strength on most of the fastening procedures.
SCB showed the lowest bond strength values besides B, S, CPP, and CR. MDP and silane are both suitable for the repair of VE.
本研究旨在通过微拉伸结合强度测试（μTBS）研究各自的机械和化学预处理对 CAD/CAM 混合陶瓷的复合修复的影响。
将 15 个 Vita Enamic（VE）CAD/CAM 块随机分为三种机械预处理：（1.）金刚石车针（D），（2.）喷丸处理（A），（3.）化学机械硅烷化处理（T），随后进行五种化学预处理：（1.）Clearfil SE Bond Bond（B；阴性对照），（2.）ESPE Sil（S），（3.）Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus（CPP），（4.）Clearfil Repair（CR）和（5.）Scotchbond Universal（SCB）。每个块中，n=20 个试件被锯切。一半的试件被随机选择进行即时结合强度测试，而另一半则在 37°C 下进行人工老化 6 个月 180 天，随后进行 5000 次热循环。进行微拉伸结合强度测试，并在单向和双向方差分析和 Tukey 的 HSD 中比较数据（MPa）。人工老化采用配对 t 检验（α=0.05）。使用立体显微镜（SEM）对离解的试件进行失效模式分析。
老化后 15 种紧固程序的单因素方差分析结果表明，根据 SCB-A 和 CPP-T，存在显著差异。老化后的双因素方差分析观察到 SCB 的结合强度较低。机械预处理之间无差异。人工老化对大多数紧固程序的结合强度显示出显著降低。
SCB 除了 B、S、CPP 和 CR 之外，显示出最低的结合强度值。MDP 和硅烷都适合修复 VE。
