dc.contributor | Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) | |
dc.contributor | Universidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB) | |
dc.contributor | Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-05-20T14:05:04Z | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-10-05T14:56:49Z | |
dc.date.available | 2014-05-20T14:05:04Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-10-05T14:56:49Z | |
dc.date.created | 2014-05-20T14:05:04Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011-04-01 | |
dc.identifier | Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. Hanover Park: Quintessence Publishing Co Inc, v. 13, n. 2, p. 155-162, 2011. | |
dc.identifier | 1461-5185 | |
dc.identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/22823 | |
dc.identifier | 10.3290/j.jad.a18784 | |
dc.identifier | WOS:000289754300008 | |
dc.identifier | 9234456003563666 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3896392 | |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of thermocycling (TC), self-adhesive resin cements and surface conditioning on the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) between feldspathic ceramic blocks and resin cements.Materials and Methods: Fifty-six feldspathic ceramic blocks (10 x 7 x 5 mm) (Vita Mark II) were divided into groups according to the factors "resin cement" (3 cements) and "surface conditioning" (no conditioning or conditioning [10% hydrofluoric acid etching for 5 min + silanization]) (n = 8): group 1: conditioning+Variolink II (control group); group 2: no conditioning+Biscem; group 3: no conditioning+RelyX U100; group 4: no conditioning+Maxcem Elite; group 5: conditioning+Biscem; group 6: conditioning+RelyX U100; group 7: conditioning+Maxcem Elite. The ceramic-cement blocks were sectioned to produce non-trimmed bar specimens (adhered cross-sectional area: 1 +/- 0.1 mm(2)), which were divided into two storage conditions: dry, mu TBS immediately after cutting; TC (12,000x, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C). Statistical significance was deterimined using two-way ANOVA (7 strategies and 2 storage conditions) and the post-hoc Tukey test (p<0.05).Results: Resin cement and thermocycling affected the mu TBS significantly (p = 0.001). In the dry condition, group 5 (18 +/- 6.5 MPa) presented the lowest values of mu TBS when compared to the other groups. TC decreased the mean mu TBS values significantly (p<0.05) for all resin cements tested (9.7 +/- 2.3 to 22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa), except for the resin cement RelyX U100 (22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa). In groups 3 and 4, it was not possible to measure mu TBS, since these groups had 100% pre-test failures during sectioning. Moreover, the same occurred in group 2 after TC, where 100% failure was observed during thermocycling (spontaneous failures).Conclusion: Hydrofluoric acid etching and silanization of the feldspathic ceramic surface are essential for bonding self-adhesive resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used. Non-etched ceramic is not recommended. | |
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | Quintessence Publishing Co Inc | |
dc.relation | Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | |
dc.relation | 1.691 | |
dc.relation | 0,839 | |
dc.rights | Acesso restrito | |
dc.source | Web of Science | |
dc.subject | bond strength | |
dc.subject | feldspathic ceramic | |
dc.subject | resin cements | |
dc.subject | ceramic surface treatment | |
dc.subject | thermocycling | |
dc.title | Durability of Microtensile Bond to Nonetched and Etched Feldspar Ceramic: Self-adhesive Resin Cements vs Conventional Resin | |
dc.type | Artigo | |