Intra‐oral adhesive systems for ceramic repairs: a comparison

Authors

  • Ovul Kumbuloglu Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey
  • Atilla User Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomaterials Research, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
  • Suna Toksavul Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey
  • Pekka K. Vallittu Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Biomaterials Research, University of Turku, Turku, Finland

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1080/00016350310005556

Keywords:

All‐ceramics, intra‐oral repair, shear bond strength

Abstract

The aim of this investigation was to compare the bond strength of restorative composite resin to dental ceramic conditioned with primers and adhesives of various commercial repair kits. Three intra‐oral ceramic repair systems—Silistor (Heraeus Kulzer), Cimara (Voco), Ceramic Repair (Vivadent)—were used on all‐ceramic (IPS Empress 2, Ivoclar‐Vivadent) substrate. Shear bond strength of restorative composite resin to substrate was tested after thermocycling and without thermocycling (n=10). Substrate surfaces of the specimen after loading were examined microscopically (SEM). The highest bond strengths in both water‐stored (7.0±5.7 MPa) and thermocycled conditions (2.5±1.8 MPa) were obtained with the Vivadent repair system, while the lowest values were observed with the Cimara system (0.6±1.4 MPa and 0.0±0.0 MPa, respectively). Shear bond strengths appeared to be significantly affected by thermocycling (ANOVA, P<0.05). It is concluded that there are significant differences in the bond strengths of resin composites and ceramic substrate. The roughened surface does not necessarily provide a better bond strength; the bond strength of composite decreases with storage in water and after thermocycling. Bond strength values were generally low for all of the tested materials.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2003-01-01