Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1377
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2023  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 59

Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments

1 Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Materials Research Center, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2 Department of Cosmetic and Restorative Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
3 Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Zahra Soroush
Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Vakilabad Boulevard, Mashhad
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.377579

Rights and Permissions

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic and to compare it with lithium disilicate ceramic. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 80 specimens containing two glass ceramics of IPS e.max press and VITA SUPRINITY were prepared and categorized into four groups according to the surface treatments (n = 10) as Group 1 (C): no treatment (control); Group 2 (HF): etching with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s followed by silane application; Group 3 (SPH): sandblasting with Al2O3 particles (50 μm), etching with 35% phosphoric acid for 40 s followed by application of silane and adhesive (Clearfil liner bond F); and Group 4 (SB): sandblasting with Al2O3 followed by silanization. Then, a resin cement (Panavia F2) was applied to the prepared ceramic surfaces. All samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles, 5–55). The μSBS test was evaluated and failure modes were recorded. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk, two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's Honest Significant Difference post hoc tests (P < 0.05). Results: IPS e.max press samples revealed significantly higher μSBS values compared to VITA SUPRINITY (P < 0.001), in whole surface treatments. The HF group showed the highest μSBS value, followed by the SPH and SB groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Adhesive failure was recorded as a predominant failure mode. Conclusion: The adhesion performance of IPS e.max press was significantly higher than VITA SUPRINITY. The common surface treatment protocol including HF application followed by silanization was the most effective surface treatment for both glass ceramics.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded9    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal