Kim Mijoo, Lee Jimin, Park Chan, Jo Deukwon, Yu Bo, Khalifah Shahed Al, Hayashi Marc, Kim Reuben H
Restorative Materials and Applied Dental Research Laboratory, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Section of Restorative Dentistry, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Polymers (Basel). 2024 Jun 27;16(13):1838. doi: 10.3390/polym16131838.
The development of high-filled 3D printing resin necessitates a bonding protocol for dental indirect restorations to achieve optimal bond strength after cementation. This study evaluates shear bond strengths of high-filler 3D printed materials for permanent restorations with various surface treatments. Rodin Sculpture 1.0 (50% lithium disilicate fillers) and 2.0 Ceramic Nanohybrid (>60% zirconia and lithium disilicate fillers) were tested, with Aelite All-Purpose Body composite resin as control. Samples were prepared, post-cured, and sandblasted with alumina (25 µm). Surface roughness was analyzed using an optical profilometer. Two bonding protocols were compared. First, groups were treated with lithium disilicate silane (Porcelain Primer) or zirconia primer (Z-Prime Plus) or left untreated without a bonding agent. Beam-shaped resin cement (DuoLink Universal) specimens were bonded and stored in a 37 °C water bath. Second, additional sets of materials were coated with a bonding agent (All-Bond Universal), either followed by silane application or left untreated. These sets were then similarly stored alongside resin cement specimens. Shear bond tests were performed after 24 h. SEM images were taken after debonding. One-Way ANOVA and post hoc Duncan were performed for the statistical analysis. Rodin 1.0 exhibited increased adhesive failure with silane or zirconia primer coating, but significantly improved bond strengths with bonding agent application. Rodin 2.0 showed consistent bond strengths regardless of bonding agent application, but cohesive failure rates increased with bonding agent and filler coating. In all groups, except for Rodin 1.0 without bonding agent, silane coating increased cohesive failure rate. In conclusion, optimal shear bond strength for high-filler 3D printing materials can be achieved with silane coating and bonding agent application.
高填充3D打印树脂的发展需要一种用于牙科间接修复体的粘结方案，以便在粘结后获得最佳粘结强度。本研究评估了经过各种表面处理的用于永久修复的高填充3D打印材料的剪切粘结强度。测试了罗丹雕塑1.0（50%二硅酸锂填料）和2.0陶瓷纳米混合材料（>60%氧化锆和二硅酸锂填料），以Aelite通用型复合树脂作为对照。制备样品，进行后固化，并用氧化铝（25 µm）喷砂处理。使用光学轮廓仪分析表面粗糙度。比较了两种粘结方案。首先，将各组用二硅酸锂硅烷（瓷底漆）或氧化锆底漆（Z-Prime Plus）处理，或不使用粘结剂不进行处理。将梁形树脂水门汀（DuoLink通用型）试件进行粘结，并储存在37℃水浴中。其次，另外几组材料用粘结剂（All-Bond通用型）进行涂覆，要么随后进行硅烷处理，要么不进行处理。然后将这些组与树脂水门汀试件一起以同样的方式储存。24小时后进行剪切粘结试验。脱粘后拍摄扫描电子显微镜图像。进行单因素方差分析和事后邓肯检验以进行统计分析。罗丹1.0在使用硅烷或氧化锆底漆涂层时表现出粘结破坏增加，但在使用粘结剂时粘结强度显著提高。罗丹2.0无论是否使用粘结剂，粘结强度都保持一致，但随着粘结剂和填料涂层的使用，内聚破坏率增加。在所有组中，除了未使用粘结剂的罗丹1.0外，硅烷涂层增加了内聚破坏率。总之，通过硅烷涂层和粘结剂的使用，可以实现高填充3D打印材料的最佳剪切粘结强度。
