2018The Open Dentistry JournalOpen access

Bond to Zirconia Ceramic: Evaluation of Different Primers and a Universal Adhesive

Diego Fabris Ferreira da Silva, Raquel de Oliveira Lopes, Niélli Caetano de Souza, Maurem Leitão Marcondes, Patrícia Danesi, Ana Maria Spohr

Open full text 6 citations

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of a universal adhesive and different primers on the bond strength to zirconia ceramic. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five zirconia ceramic samples were obtained and divided into five groups (n=15): G1–Scothbond Universal (SBU); G2 – silane + SBU; G3 - Signum Zirconia Bond; G4 - Z-Prime Plus; G5 - MZ Primer. A cone of composite resin was built. The specimens were stored in 100% relative humidity with distilled water at 37°C for 48 h and then submitted to a tensile bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The type of failure that occurred during the de-bonding procedure was analyzed. Results: The mean results of the bond strength test (MPa) followed by the same letter represent no statistical difference by ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test ( p <0.05): G2=27.55 a (±6.99), G4=23.71 a (±5.65), G1=22.64 a (±5.67), G5=13.64 b (±5.49), G3=7.54 c (±4.75). G2 and G4 exhibited predominantly cohesive failure in the composite resin cone. G1 and G5 had predominantly mixed failures, and G3 exhibited only adhesive failures. Conclusion: The SBU and Z-Prime Plus provided higher bond strength to zirconia ceramic.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of a universal adhesive and different primers on the bond strength to zirconia ceramic. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five zirconia ceramic samples were obtained and divided into five groups (n=15): G1–Scothbond Universal (SBU); G2 – silane + SBU; G3 - Signum Zirconia Bond; G4 - Z-Prime Plus; G5 - MZ Primer. A cone of composite resin was built. The specimens were stored in 100% relative humidity with distilled water at 37°C for 48 h and then submitted to a tensile bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The type of failure that occurred during the de-bonding procedure was analyzed. Results: The mean results of the bond strength test (MPa) followed by the same letter represent no statistical difference by ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test ( p <0.05): G2=27.55 a (±6.99), G4=23.71 a (±5.65), G1=22.64 a (±5.67), G5=13.64 b (±5.49), G3=7.54 c (±4.75). G2 and G4 exhibited predominantly cohesive failure in the composite resin cone. G1 and G5 had predominantly mixed failures, and G3 exhibited only adhesive failures. Conclusion: The SBU and Z-Prime Plus provided higher bond strength to zirconia ceramic.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of a universal adhesive and different primers on the bond strength to zirconia ceramic. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five zirconia ceramic samples were obtained and divided into five groups (n=15): G1–Scothbond Universal (SBU); G2 – silane + SBU; G3 - Signum Zirconia Bond; G4 - Z-Prime Plus; G5 - MZ Primer. A cone of composite resin was built. The specimens were stored in 100% relative humidity with distilled water at 37°C for 48 h and then submitted to a tensile bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The type of failure that occurred during the de-bonding procedure was analyzed. Results: The mean results of the bond strength test (MPa) followed by the same letter represent no statistical difference by ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test ( p <0.05): G2=27.55 a (±6.99), G4=23.71 a (±5.65), G1=22.64 a (±5.67), G5=13.64 b (±5.49), G3=7.54 c (±4.75). G2 and G4 exhibited predominantly cohesive failure in the composite resin cone. G1 and G5 had predominantly mixed failures, and G3 exhibited only adhesive failures. Conclusion: The SBU and Z-Prime Plus provided higher bond strength to zirconia ceramic.

Key concepts: Cubic zirconia, Bond strength, Universal testing machine, Adhesive, Crosshead, Ceramic, Materials science, Silane

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Bond to Zirconia Ceramic: Evaluation of Different Primers and a Universal Adhesive — Research Paper | ScholarLens