Evaluation of the effect of saliva contamination and cleaning methods on the surface free energy and shear bond strength of resin cements to zirconia ceramics | ||||
| Al-Azhar Dental Journal for Girls | ||||
| Article 9, Volume 5, Issue 4, October 2018, Page 385-398 PDF (1.64 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjg.2018.20024 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Aliaa F. Gadallah1; Inas T. Motawea2; Rania E. Bayoumi3 | ||||
| 1Demonstrator, Dental Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Professor, Head of, Dental Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Lecturer, Dental Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Objective: This study was designated to evaluate the effect of saliva contamination and cleaning methods on the surface free energy and the shear bond strength of resin cement to zirconia ceramics. Materials and Methods: A total of 80 samples were copy milled (CAD/CAM) from Zirconia blank. The samples were randomly divided into (4) groups (n=20) according to method of cleaning. Group 1 (control): No saliva contamination,Group 2: The samples cleaned with distilled water,Group 3: The samples cleaned with ivoclean, Group4:The samples cleaned with re-sandblasting. Each group was subdivided into 2 subgroups according to the type of adhesive resin cement (Multilink Speed and RelyX Ultimate) used (n=10). Each subgroup was further subdivided into two divisions according to the type of test (surface free energy and bond strength) performed (n=5). One-way analysis of variance ANOVA test and Tukey’ post hoc test were done for comparing variables. Results: The control groups record the lowest mean contact angle value (25.81°±1.76°) and the highest mean surface free energy value (107.57mN/m). While the group washed with water revealed the highest mean contact angle value (39.04°±0.68°) and the lowest mean surface free energy value (98.58 mN/m). Regarding shear bond strength the results showed that the highest shear bond strength value was recorded for the control group (14.33±1.98& 13.73±1.33 MPa), for Multi-link speed and Rely-X ultimate cement respectively , followed by re-sandblasting group, followed by ivoclean group, while the lowest shear bond strength value was recorded for the group washed with water (10.9±0.53& 8.22±0.85 MPa). However, regardless of the cleaning protocol groups, Multi-link speed cement recorded a higher mean shear bond strength value than RelyX Ultimate cement. However these difference was statistically non-significant except for the group washed with water (p=0.0003) as indicated by unpaired t test. Failure modes for all groups were evaluated, failure modes was either adhesive, cohesive or mixed, with frequency ranging from 20 to 40% for each type of failure. The group washed with water showed that allof cases of failure were of the adhesive type in both cement (100%). Conclusion: Cleaning of the contaminated ceramic surface before adhesive cementation is an indispensable step in order to achieve a strong bond. Moreover, the removal of surface contaminants by sandblasting and Ivoclean paste can be considered efficient cleaning methods for zirconia surfaces | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| (CAD/CAM) zirconia ceramics; surface free energy; Shear bond strength | ||||
| References | ||||
|
Odén A, Andersson M, Krystek-Ondracek I, Magnusson D. Five-year clinical evaluation of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1998;80:450– 6 2. Kern M, Wegner SM. Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability. Dent Mater. 1998; 14:64–71. 3. Kosmac T, Oblak C, Jevnikar P, Funduk N, Marion L. The effect of surface grinding and sandblasting on flexural strength and reliability of Y-TZP zirconia ceramic. Dent Mater. 1999; 15:426–33. 4. Borges GA, Sophr AM, de Goes MF, Sobrinho LC, Chan DC. Effect of etching and airborne particle abrasion on the microstructure of different dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89:479–88. 5. Della Bona A, Anusavice KJ, Mecholsky JJ. Failure analysis of resin composite bonded to ceramic. Dent Mater 2003; 19:693-9. 6. Valandro LF, Della Bona A, Antonio Bottino M, Neisser MP. The effect of ceramic surface treatment on bonding to densely sintered alumina ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 253-9. 7. Papia E, Larsson C, du Toit M, Vult von Steyern P. Bonding between oxide ceramics and adhesive cement systems: A systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater .2014; 102: 395-413 8. Inokoshi M, Kameyama A, De Munck J, Minakuchi S, Van Meerbeek B. Durable bonding to mechanically and/or chemically pre-treated dental zirconia. J Dent 2013; 41: 170-19 9. Wolfart M, Lehmann F, Wolfart S, et al. Durability of the resin bond strength to zirconia ceramic after using different surface conditioning methods. Dent. Mater. 2007; 23:45–50. 10. Bona A D, Oscar E. Pecho Alessandretti R. Zirconia as a Dental Biomaterial. Materials (Basel). 2015; 8: 4978-91. 11. Sakaguchi R L, Powers J M. Craig’s restorative dental materials.2012;13th ed:327-29 12. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites: strength of the bond to dentin versus surface energy parameters. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 1039-43. 13. Della Bona A., van Noort R. Shear vs. tensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to ceramic. J. Dent. Res. 1995;74:1591–96 14. Rosenstiel SO, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1995;.622 15. Millstein PL, HO JC, Naim W, Nathanson D. Effect of a silicone fit-indicator on crown retention in vitro. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 62: 510-11. 16. Yang B, Lange-Jansen H, Scharnberg M, Wolfart S, Ludwig K, Adelung R, et al. Influence of saliva contamination on zirconia ceramic bonding. Dent. Mater. 2008; 24: 508–13. 17. Zhang S, Kocjan A, Lehmann F, Kosmač T, Kern M. Influence of contamination on resin bond strength to nano- structured alumina-coated zirconia ceramic. Eur J Oral Sci 2010;118:396-403 18. Nishigawa G, Maruo Y, Irie M, Oka M, Yoshihara K. Ultrasonic cleaning of silica-coated zirconia influences bond strength between zirconia and resin luting material. Dent. Mat.J. 2008; 27:842-8. 19. Feitosa SA , Patel D , Bottino MA , O¨zcan M , Bottino MC, Valandro LF, et al Effect of Cleansing Methods on Saliva-Contaminated Zirconia-An : Evaluation of Resin Bond Durability. Oper. Dent. 2014; 39-6. 20. Brown DT, Platt J A, Srinivasan M, Bottino MC, Levon J A. Influence of saliva contamination on resin bond durability to zirconia – effect of cleaning methods, Indiana University School of Dentistry, 2015. Castellan CS, Pereira PN, Grande RH, Bedran-Russo AK. Mechanical characterization of proanthocyanidin-dentin matrix interaction, Dent Mater; 26:968-73, 2010. 22. Ishii R, Tsujimoto A, Takamizawa T, Tsubota K, Suzuki T, Shimamura Y, et al. Influence of surface treatment of contaminated zirconia on surface free energy and resin cement bonding. Dent Mater J 2015; 34: 91–7 23. Nishigori AA, Yoshida T, Bottino MC, Platt JA, Plattsushi Nishigori JA.Influence of zirconia surface treatment on veneering porcelain shear bond strength after cyclic loading. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 1392–8. 24. Ozcan M, Melo RM, Souza RO, Machado JP, Felipe Valandro L, Botttino MA. Effect of air-particle abrasion protocols on the biaxial flexural strength, surface characteristics and phase transformation of zirconia after cyclic loading. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2013; 20:19-28. 25. Souza RO, Valandro LF, Melo RM, Machado JP, Bottino MA, Ozcan M. Air-particle abrasion on zirconia ceramic using different protocols: effects on biaxial flexural strength after cyclic loading, phase transformation and surface topography. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2013; 26:155-63. 26. Preetha A. and Banerjee R. Comparison of Artificial Saliva Substitutes. Trends Biomater. Artif. Organs, January 2005; 18 :178-86 27. Hu X, Ling J, Gao Y. Effects of Irrigation Solutions on Dentin Wettability and Roughness. J Endod, 2010; 36: 1064–7. 28. Gonzalez-Martin ML, Labajos-broncano L, Janczuk B.,Bruque J.M. Wettability and surface free energy of zirconia ceramics and their constituents. J mat sci 1999; 34 :5923 – 26 29. Quaasa AC, Yangb B, Kernb M. Panavia F 2.0 bonding to contaminated zirconia ceramic after different cleaning procedures. Dent. Mater. 2007; 23: 506–12. 30. El-Shrkawy ZR, El-Hosary MM, Saleh O, Mandour MH. Effect of different surface treatments on bond strength, surface and microscopic structure of zirconia ceramic . FDJ. 2016; 2: 41-53. 31. Doungsri J and Arksornnukit M. Effect of cleaning solutions on shear bond strength of resin cement to saliva contaminated lithium disilicate eramic. International Graduate Research Conference 2013. 32. Scientific documentation Ivoclean. 33. Blatz MB, Sadan A, Martin J, Lang B. In vitro evaluation of shear bond strengths of resin to densely-sintered high-purity zirconium-oxide ceramic after long-term storage and thermal cycling. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2004; 91: 356-62. 34. Yang B, Barloi A, Kern M. Influence of air-abrasion on zirconia ceramic bonding using an adhesive composite resin. Dent. Mater. 2010; 26:44-50. 35. Kern M, Wegner SM. Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability. Dent. Mater. 1998; 14: 64-71 36. Miyazaki T, Nakamura T, Matsumura H, Ban S, Kobayashi T. Current status of zirconia restoration. J Prosthodont Res. 2013; 57: 236-61. 37. Casucci A, Osorio E, Osorio R, Monticelli F, Toledano M, Mazitelli C, et al. Influence of different surface treatments on surface zirconia frameworks. J. Dent. 2009; 37: 891–97. 38. Thompson JY, Stoner BR, Piascik JR, Smith R. Adhesion/cementation to zirconia and other non-silicate ceramics: where are we now? Dent. Mater. 2011; 27: 71-82. 39. Román-Rodríguez JL, Roig-Vanaclocha A, Fons-Font A, GranellRuiz M, Solá-Ruiz MF, Amigó-Borrás V, et al. In vitro experimental study of bonding between aluminium oxide ceramics and resin cements. Med. Oral Patol. Oral Cir Bucal. 2010; 15: 95-100. 40. Tanaka R, Fujishima A, Shibata Y, Manabe A, Miyazaki T. Cooperation of phosphate monomer and silica modification on zirconia. J. Dent. Res. 2008; 87: 666-670. 41. Castle JE. The composition of metal surfaces after atmospheric exposure: An historical perspective. J. Adhesion. 2008; 84: 368–88. 42. Nishigawa G, Maruo Y , Irie M , Maeda N , Yoshihara K , Nagaoka N, et al. Various Effects of Sandblasting of Dental Restorative Materials.J pone.2016; 0147077 43. Phark JH, Duarte Jr S, Kahn H, Blatz MB, Sadan A. Influence of contamination and cleaning on bond strength to modified zirconia. Dent. Mater. 2009; 25:1541-50. 44. Kim D, Son J, Jeong S, Kim Y, Kim K, Kwon T-Y. Efficacy of various cleaning solutions on saliva-contaminated zirconia for improved resin bonding . J.Adv. Prosthodont. 2015; 7: 85-92. 45. Carlen A, Nikdel K, Wennerberg A, Holmberg K, Olsson J. Surface characteristics and in vitro biofilm formation on glass ionomer and composite resin. Biomaterials. 2001; 22: 481-87. 46. Scientific documentation MultiLink Speed. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 349 PDF Download: 427 |
||||
