• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.22-32
• /
• 2020

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of four computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks repaired with composite resin using three different surface treatment protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Four different CAD/CAM blocks were used in this study: (1) flexible hybrid ceramic (FHC), (2) resin nanoceramic (RNC), (c) polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) and (4) feldspar ceramic (FC). All groups were further divided into four subgroups according to surface treatment: control, hydrofluoric acid etching (HF), air-borne particle abrasion with aluminum oxide (AlO), and tribochemical silica coating (TSC). After surface treatments, silane was applied to half of the specimens. Then, a silane-containing universal adhesive was applied, and specimens were repaired with a composite, Next, µSBS test was performed. Additional specimens were examined with a contact profilometer and scanning electron microscopy. The data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey tests. RESULTS. The findings revealed that silane application yielded higher µSBS values (P<.05). All surface treatments were showed a significant increase in µSBS values compared to the control (P<.05). For FHC and RNC, the most influential treatments were AlO and TSC (P<.05). CONCLUSION. Surface treatment is mandatory when the silane is not preferred, but the best bond strength values were obtained with the combination of surface treatment and silane application. HF provides improved bond strength when the ceramic content of material increases, whereas AlO and TSC gives improved bond strength when the composite content of material increases.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.13 no.5
• /
• pp.281-291
• /
• 2021

PURPOSE. To evaluate the wear of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) dental ceramic materials opposed by enamel as a function of increased chewing forces. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The enamel cusps of healthy human third molar teeth (n = 40) opposed by materials from CAD-CAM dental ceramic groups (n = 10), including Vita Enamic^® (ENA), a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN); GC Cerasmart^® (CERA), a resin nanoceramic; Celtra^® Duo (DUO), a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) ceramic; and IPS e.max ZirCAD (ZIR), a polycrystalline zirconia, were exposed to chewing simulation (1,200,000 cycles; 120 N load; 1 Hz frequency; 0.7 mm lateral and 2 mm vertical motion). The wear of both enamel cusps and materials was quantified using a 3D laser scanner, and the wear mechanisms were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The results were analysed using Welch ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis test (α = .05). RESULTS. ZIR showed lower volume loss (0.02 ± 0.01 mm³) than ENA, CERA and DUO (P = .001, P = .018 and P = .005, respectively). The wear of cusp/DUO [0.59 mm³ (0.50-1.63 mm³)] was higher than cusp/CERA [0.17 mm³ (0.04-0.41 mm³)] (P = .007). ZIR showed completely different wear mechanism in SEM. CONCLUSION. Composite structured materials such as PICN and ZLS ceramic exhibit more abrasive effect on opposing enamel due to their loss against wear, compared to uniform structured zirconia. The resin nano-ceramic causes the lowest enamel wear thanks to its flexible nano-ceramic microstructure. While zirconia appears to be an enamel-friendly material in wear volume loss, it can cause microstructural defects of enamel.