Monolitik CAD/CAM Bloklara Uygulanan Farklı Yüzey Uygulamaları ve Simanlarla Bağlantı Kuvvetine Güncel Bak

ÖZ Doğal dişi her yönüyle taklit eden materyal arayışları günümüzde monolitik olarak kullanılabilen farklı üreticilere ait cam, reçine infiltre, zirkonya seramikler ile zirkonyayla güçlendirilmiş lityum disilikat seramiklerin ortaya çıkışına yol açmıştır. Bu materyaller kullanılarak yapılan restorasyonların başarısı ise, en başta uygulanan restorasyonun yerinde kalması, diğer bir deyişle bağlantı dayanımı, tarafından belirlenmektedir. Tümü güncel olan ve rutin klinik kullanıma sahip bu materyallerin bağlantı dayanımını artırmak için pek çok yöntem denenmeye devam etmektedir. Bağlantı dayanımını artıran yöntemler arasında mekanik işlemler olarak; kumlama, döner alet ile pürüzlendirme ve lazer uygulama, kimyasal işlemler olarak; hidroflorik asit (HF) ile pürüzlendirme, tribokimyasal silika ile kaplama ve silan bağlayıcı ajan kullanımı üzerinde araştırmalar mevcuttur. Çalışmalara göre mekanik ve kimyasal işlemler sonucunda elde edilen yüzey özelliklerine göre başarıyı etkileyen bağlantı dayanımı da önemli derecede değişmektedir. Bu derlemede farklı yüzey işlemleri sonrası CAD/CAM monolitik seramiklerin reçine siman ile bağlantı dayanımı ve çalışma yöntemleri üzerinde daha önce yapılmış çalışmalar ışığında güncel bir bilgi sunulması amaçlanmıştır. Anahtar Sözcükler: Monolitik restorasyon, Bağlantı dayanımı, Termal döngü

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Monolitik restorasyon, Bağlantı dayanımı, Termal döngü

Current Insight into Different Surface Treatments of Monolithic CAD/CAM Blocks and Bond Strength with Cements

ABSTRACT Researches to develop the materials mimicking all the features of natural tooth structure have resulted the evolution of monolithic glass, resin infiltrated, zirconia and zirconia reinforced lithium disilicate ceramics. The success of the restorations made of these materials are greatly depends on the staying in place of the restorations, in other words the bond strength. There are many studies to improve the bond strength of these recent and routine clinical materials in the dental literature. According to the studies one of the factor determining the success of restoration, bond strength, is affected from the surfaces created by chemical and mechanical treatments. The surface treatment studies using the mechanical processes such as sandblasting, grinding and laser application and chemical processes such as hydrofluoric acid (HF) application, tribochemical silica coating and the use of silane coupling agent were performed in the past. The aim of the present review was giving a current knowledge to the authors about the bond strength and research methods of resin and CAD/CAM monolithic ceramics in the lights of the previous studies. Key Words: Monolithic restoration, Bond strenght, Termocycling

Keywords:

Monolithic restoration, Bond strenght, Termocycling,

PDF

___

1.Albashaireh ZS, Ghazal M, Kern M. Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104:105–113.
2. Preis V, Behr M, Kolbeck C, Hahnel S, Handel G, Rosentritt M. Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains. Dent Mater 2011; 27:796–804.
3. Rosentritt M, Preis V, Behr M, Hahnel S, Handel G, Kolbeck C. Two-body wear of dental porcelain and substructure oxide ceramics. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16:935–943.
4. Jung YS, Lee JW, Choi YJ, Ahn JS, Shin SW, Huh JB. A study on the in-vitro wear of the natural tooth structure by opposing zirconia or dental porcelain. J Adv Prosthodont 2010; 2:111–115.
5. Stawarczyk B, Ozcan M, Schmutz F, Trottmann A, Roos M, Hämmerle CHF. Two-body wear of mono- lithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corre- sponding enamel antagonists. Acta Odontol Scand 2013; 71:102–112.
6. Fahl N Jr, McLaren EA, Margeas RC. Monolithic vs. layered restorations: considerations for achieving the optimum result. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2014; 35:78-9.
7. Gracis S, Thompson VP, Ferencz JL, Silva NR, Bon- fante EA. A new classification system for all-ceramic and ceramic-like restorative materials. Int J Prosthodont 2015; 28: 227-235.
8. Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98: 389-404.
9. Yoshida K, Tsuo Y, Atsuta M. Bonding of dual-cured resin cement to zirconia ceramic using phosphate acid ester monomer and zirconate coupler. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006; 77:28-33.
10. Thompson J, Stoner B, Piascik J, Smith R. Adhesion/cementation to zirconia and other non-silicate ceramics: Where are we now Dent Mater 2011;27: 71–82.
11. Miyahara H, Ikeda H, Fujio Y, Yoshii S, Nagamatsu Y, Chiaki K, Shimizu H. Chemical alteration of Ag-Pd-Cu-Au alloy surface by alumina air-abrasion and its effect on bonding to resin cement. Dental Materials Journal 2019;38: 630–637.
12. Valandro LF, Ozcan M, Bottino MC, Bottino MA, Scotti R, Bona AD. Bond strength of a resin cement to high-alumina and zirconia-reinforced ceramics: the effect of surface conditioning. J Adhes Dent 2006;8: 175-181.
13. Moretto SG, de Freitas PM, Inca HEC, Cesar PF, Bello-Silva MS, de Paula Eduardo C. Influence of Er:YAG laser surface treatment on flexural and bond strengths to glass-infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic. Lasers Med Sci. 2020. doi; 10.1007/s10103-020-03205-w
14. Ersu B, Yuzugullu B, Ruya Yazici A, Canay S. Surface roughness and bond strengths of glass-infiltrated alumina-ceramics prepared using various surface treatments. J Dent 2009;37:848-56.
15. de Paula Eduardo C, Bello-Silva MS, Moretto SG, Cesar PF, de Freitas PM Microtensile bond strength of composite resin to glass-infiltrated alumina composite conditioned with Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27:7–14.
16. Akin H, Ozkurt Z, Kirmali O, Kazazoglu E, Ozdemir A. Shear bond strength of resin cement to zirconia ceramic after aluminum oxide sandblasting and various laser treatments. Photomed Laser Surg 2011; 29:797–802.
17. Gokce B, Ozpinar B, Dundar M, Comlekoglu E, Sen BH, Gungor MA. Bond strengths of all-ceramics: acid vs laser etching. Oper Dent 2007; 32:173–8.
18. Akyil MS, Yilmaz A, Bayindir F, Duymus ZY. Microtensile bond strength of resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic. Photomed Laser Surg 2011; 29:197–203.
19. Tian T, Tsoi JK, Matinlinna JP, Burrow MF. Aspects of bonding between resin luting cements and glass ceramic materials. Dent Mater 2014;30: e147-62.
20. Yu H, Du C, Cao Y. Shear bond test of hf acid etching machinable porcelain bonded to enamel with different concentration and disposing time. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 1998; 16:169–71.
21. Pattanaik S, Wadkar AP. Effect of etchant variability on shear bond strength of all ceramic restorations – an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2011; 11:55–62.
22. Barghi N, Fischer DE, Vatani L. Effects of porcelain leucite content, types of etchants, and etching time on porcelain-composite bond. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006; 18:47–52.
23. Shimada Y, Yamaguchi S, Tagami J. Micro-shear bond strength of dual-cured resin cement to glass ceramics. Dent Mater 2002; 18:380–8.
24. Ozcan M. The use of chairside silica coating for different dental applications: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87:469-72.
25. Xible AA, de Jesus Tavarez RR, de Araujo CRP, Bonachela WC. Effect of silica coating and silanization on flexural and composite-resin bond strengths of zirconia posts: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95: 224-229.
26. Bielen V, Inokoshi M, Munck JD, Zhang F, Vanmeensel K, Minakuchi S, Vleugels J, Naert I, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding Effectiveness to Differently Sandblasted Dental Zirconia. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17:235-42.
27. Altan B, Cinar S, Tuncelli B. Evaluation of shear bond strength of zirconia-based monolithic CAD-CAM materials to resin cement after different surface treatments. Niger J Clin Pract 2019; 22:1475-1482.
28. Bona AD, Pecho OE, Alessandretti R. Zirconia as a Dental Biomaterial. Materials (Basel) 2015; 4;8:4978-4991.
29. 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.
30. Senyilmaz DP, Palin WM, Shortall ACC, Burke FJT. The effect of surface preparation and luting agent on bond strength to a zirconium-based ceramic. Oper Dent 2007; 32:623–630.
31.Pisani-Proenca J, Erhardt MC, Valandro LF, Gutierrez-Aceves G, Bolanos-Carmona MV, Del Castillo-Salmeron R, Bottino MA. Influence of ceramic surface conditioning and resin cements on microtensile bond strength to a glass ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96:412–7.
32. Sathish S, Lakshmi S, Patel P, Annapoorni H. Effect of thermocycling on the micro-tensile bond strength between self-adhesive resin cement and nonphosphate monomer cements on zirconium-oxide ceramics. Indian J Dent Res 2019; 30:73-79.
33. Crim GA, Swartz ML, Phillips RW. Comparison of four thermocycling techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53:50–3.
34. Kansal R, Rani S, Kumar M, Kumar S, Issar G. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of newer resin cement (RelyX ultimate and RelyX U200) to lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramics as influenced by thermocycling. Contemp Clin Dent 2018; 9:601‐6.
35. Loher H, Behr M, Hintereder U, Rosentritt M, Handel G. The impact of cement mixing and storage errors on the risk of failure of glass–ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig 2009; 13:217–22.
36. Turker N, Buyukkaplan UŞ, Başar EK, Özarslan MM. The effects of different surface treatments on the shear bond strengths of two dual-cure resin cements to CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Adv Prosthodont 2020; 12:189-96.
37. Barutcigil K, Barutcigil Ç, Kul E, Özarslan MM, Buyukkaplan US. Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Bond Strength of Resin Cement to a CAD/CAM Restorative Material. J Prosthodont 2019; 28:71-78.
38. Kursoğlu P, Motro PF, Yurdaguven H. Shear bond strength of resin cement to an acid etched and a laser irradiated ce- ramic surface. J Adv Prosthodont 2013; 5:98-103.
39. García-Sanz V, Paredes-Gallardo V, Mendoza-Yero O, Carbonell-Leal M, Albaladejo A, Montiel-Company JM, Bellot-Arcís C. The effects of lasers on bond strength to ceramic materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018 ;2;13: e0190736.
40. Kara HB, Ozturk AN, Aykent F, Koc O, Ozturk B. The effect of different surface treatments on roughness and bond strength in low fusing ceramics. Lasers Med Sci 2011; 26:599-604.
41. Hummel M, Kern M. Durability of the resin bond strength to the alumina ceramic Procera. Dent Mater 2004; 20:498–508. 42. Won-suck O, Shen C. Effect of surface topography on the bond strength of a composite to three different types of ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 90:241–246.
43. Peumans M, Valjakova EB, De Munck J, Mishevska CB, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding Effectiveness of Luting Composites to Different CAD/CAM Materials. J Adhes Dent 2016; 18(4):289-302.
44.Bayazıt EÖ. Microtensile Bond Strength of Self-Adhesive Resin Cements to CAD/CAM Resin-Matrix Ceramics Prepared with Different Surface Treatments. Int J Prosthodont 2019; 32:433-438.
45. Cekic-Nagas I, Ergun G, Egilmez F, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials. J Prosthodont Res 2016; 60:265–273.
46. Tian T, Tsoi JKH, Matinlinna JP, Burrow MF. Evaluation of microtensile bond strength on ceramic-resin adhesion using two specimen testing substrates Int J Adhes 2014; 54:165-71.
47. Elsaka SE. Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of resin cements to monolithic zirconia. J Adhes Dent 2016; 18:387-395.
48. LE M, Larsson C, Papia E. Bond strength between MDP-based cement and translucent zirconia. Dent Mater J 2019; 38:480-489.
49. Salem RST, Ozkurt-Kayahan Z, Kazazoglu E. In Vitro Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Three Primer/Resin Cement Systems to Monolithic Zirconia. Int J Prosthodont 2019; 32:519-525.
50. Liu Q, Meng XF, Ding H, Luo XP. The comparative research on resin bond strength and durability of two machinable glass ceramic. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2011; 29. p. 129–131.
51. Dehoff PH, Anusavice KJ, Wang ZX. 3-Dimensional finite-element analysis of the shear bond test. Dent Mater 1995; 11:126–31.
52. Della Bona A, van Noort R. Shear vs. tensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to ceramic. J Dent Res 1995; 74:1591–6.
53. Jin XZ, Homaei E, Matinlinna JP, Tsoi JKH. A new concept and finite-element study on dental bond strength tests. Dent Mater 2016; 32: e238-e250.
54. Moharamzadeh K, Hooshmand T, Keshvad A, Van Noort R. Fracture toughness of a ceramic–resin interface. Dent Mater 2008; 24:172–7.
55 Braga RR, Meira JB, Boaro LC, Xavier TA. Adhesion to tooth structure: a critical review of "macro" test methods. Dent Mater 2010; 26: e38-49.
56. Valandro LF, Ozcan M, Amaral R, Vanderlei A, Bottino MA. Effect of testing methods on the bond strength of resin to zirconia-alumina ceramic: microtensile versus shear test. Dent Mater J 2008; 27:849-55.
57. de Sá Barbosa WF, Aguiar TR, Francescantonio MD, Cavalcanti AN, de Oliveira MT, Giannini M. Effect of water storage on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to zirconium oxide ceramic. J Adhes Dent 2013; 15:145-50.
58. Pereira PC, Castilho AA, Souza RO, Passos SP, Takahashi FE, Bottino MA. A comparison of the film thickness of two adhesive luting agents and the effect of thermocycling on their microTBs to feldspathic ceramic. Acta Odontol Latinoam 2009; 22:191–200.
59. Scherrer SS, Cesar PF, Swain MV. Direct comparison of the bond strength results of the different test methods: a critical literature review. Dent Mater 2010;26: e78-93.
60. Sirisha K, Rambabu T, Ravishankar Y, Ravikumar P. Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review-Part II. J Conserv Dent 2014; 17:420-6.
61. Cho BH, Dickens SH. Effects of the acetone content of single solution dentin bonding agents on the adhesive layer thickness and the microtensile bond strength. Dent Mater 2004; 20:107–15.
62. Sadek FT, Cury AH, Monticelli F, Ferrari M, Cardoso PE. The influence of the cutting speed on bond strength and integrity of microtensile specimens. Dent Mater 2005; 21:1144–9.
63. Sadek FT, Monticelli F, Muench A, Ferrari M, Cardoso PE. A novel method to obtain microtensile specimens minimizing cut flaws. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006; 78:7–14.