Tayefeh Davalloo Reza, AziziGermi Sanaz, Moghaddami Zeinab, Ebrahimi-Najafabadi Heshmatollah, Ghavami-Lahiji Mehrsima
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental Sciences Research Center, School of Dentistry, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
Department of Medicinal Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Aug 11;25(1):1314. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06614-x.
This study aimed to compare the effects of different surface treatments including sandblasting, 9% hydrofluoric (HF) acid, 48% sulfuric acid (SA), and silica gel plus SA on micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) of resin composite to Ti6A14V titanium alloy.
In this in vitro study, 60 Ti6A14V titanium alloy plates were randomly assigned to five experimental groups (n = 12) as follows: Group (1) untreated, Group (2) sandblasted (50 μm aluminum oxide particle), Group (3) acid etched in 9% HF for 60 s, Group (4) acid etched in 48% HSO at 60 °C for 30 min, and Group (5) acid etched in 50% silica-sulfuric acid (SiO-HSO) at 60 °C for 30 min. Profilometric examination and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were performed. A universal adhesive resin was applied to the plates and light-cured. One tygon tubes was placed perpendicularly to each plate. The resin composite was then placed on the treated plates and light-cured for 40 s. μ-SBS and failure mode were analyzed after 2000 thermal cycles (5 to 55 °C). Data were analyzed by ANOVA, Tukey, and Chi-square tests at the significance level of 0.05.
The μSBS was significantly different among the groups (P = 0.032). The mean µSBS of the control group was significantly lower than that of sandblasting (P < 0.001), SA etching (P = 0.009) and silica-SA (P = 0.003) groups. The Ra of sandblasting (P = 0.021) and silica-SA (P = 0.004) groups was significantly higher than the control group. Also, the Ra of HF acid group was significantly lower than that of sandblasting (P = 0.035) and silica-SA (P = 0.007) groups. The Rz of sandblasting group was significantly higher than all other groups (P < 0.001 for all).
Within the study limitations, surface treatment by sandblasting resulted in the highest surface roughness and μSBS of Ti6A14V alloy-resin composite followed by silica gel-SA, SA etching, and HF.
本研究旨在比较不同表面处理方法，包括喷砂处理、9%氢氟酸（HF）、48%硫酸（SA）以及硅胶加SA处理，对树脂复合材料与Ti6A14V钛合金之间微剪切粘结强度（μSBS）的影响。
在这项体外研究中，60块Ti6A14V钛合金板被随机分为五个实验组（n = 12），如下：第（1）组未处理；第（2）组喷砂处理（50μm氧化铝颗粒）；第（3）组在9% HF中蚀刻60秒；第（4）组在60°C的48% HSO中蚀刻30分钟；第（5）组在60°C的50%硅硫酸（SiO-HSO）中蚀刻30分钟。进行了轮廓测量检查和扫描电子显微镜（SEM）检查。将一种通用粘结树脂涂覆在板上并光固化。将一根泰根管垂直放置在每块板上。然后将树脂复合材料放置在处理过的板上并光固化40秒。在2000次热循环（5至55°C）后分析μSBS和失效模式。数据采用方差分析、Tukey检验和卡方检验进行分析，显著性水平为0.05。
各组之间的μSBS有显著差异（P = 0.032）。对照组的平均μSBS显著低于喷砂处理组（P < 0.001）、SA蚀刻组（P = 0.009）和硅胶-SA组（P = 0.003）。喷砂处理组（P = 0.021）和硅胶-SA组（P = 0.004）的粗糙度平均高度（Ra）显著高于对照组。此外，HF酸组的Ra显著低于喷砂处理组（P = 0.035）和硅胶-SA组（P = 0.007）。喷砂处理组的最大高度（Rz）显著高于所有其他组（所有P < 0.001）。
在本研究的局限性范围内，喷砂处理导致Ti6A14V合金-树脂复合材料具有最高的表面粗糙度和μSBS，其次是硅胶-SA、SA蚀刻和HF处理。
