Adhesive bonding of resin composite to various titanium surfaces using different metal conditioners and a surface modification system

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of three metal conditioners on the shear bond strength (SBS) of a prosthetic composite material to cpTi grade I having three surface treatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred sixty eight rivet-shaped specimens (8.0x2.0 mm) were cast and subjected to polishing (P) or sandblasting with either 50 mm (50SB) or 250 mm (250SB) Al(2)O(3). The metal conditioners Metal Photo Primer (MPP), Cesead II Opaque Primer (OP), Targis Link (TL), and one surface modification system Siloc (S), were applied to the specimen surfaces, which were covered with four 1-mm thick layers of resin composite. The resin layers were exposed to curing light for 90 s separately. Seven specimens from each experimental group were stored in water at 37ºC for 24 h while the other 7 specimens were subjected to 5,000 thermal cycles consisting of water baths at 4ºC and 60ºC (n=7). All specimens were subjected to SBS test (0.5 mm/min) until failure occurred, and further 28 specimens were analyzed using scanning electron microscope (SEM) and X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Data were analyzed by 3-way ANOVA followed by post-hoc Tukey's test (α=0.05). RESULTS: On 50SB surfaces, OP groups showed higher SBS means than MPP (P<0.05), while no significant difference was found among OP, S, and TL groups. On 250SB surfaces, OP and TL groups exhibited higher SBS than MPP and S (P<0.05). No significant difference in SBS was found between OP and TL groups nor between MPP and S groups. The use of conditioners on 250SB surfaces resulted in higher SBS means than the use of the same products on 50SB surfaces (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Sandblasting associated with the use of metal conditioners improves SBS of resin composites to cpTi

Shear Bond Strength of Composite Veneers and Acrylic Veneer Bonded to Ni–Cr Alloy: A Laboratory Study

A growing number of composite materials are being used as an alternative for veneering cast restorations. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength of UDMA based composite, restorative composite, and heat cure acrylic when veneered to Ni–Cr alloy and to evaluate the type of bond failure. Three different veneering materials were used: heat cure acrylic, UDMA based composite and a restorative composite. 10 samples were fabricated, each with heat cure acrylic and restorative composite and 20 samples were fabricated with UDMA based composite; thus, the total number of samples amounted to 40. All the samples were subject to shear bond stress fracture tests and observed for the type of bond failure. The greatest mean shear bond strength was recorded in relation to the UDMA based composite material when thermal conducting paste was used during the curing (10.51 MPa). The mean bond strength values of UDMA based composite without thermal conducting paste (8.92 MPa), heat cured acrylic veneering material (4.24 MPa) and restorative composite material (5.03 MPa) were significantly different from each other (p > 0.05). Samples veneered with heat cure acrylic veneering material and restorative composite material showed adhesive failure. Samples prepared with UDMA based composite veneering composite showed cohesive or predominantly cohesive failure. UDMA based composite veneering material when used with heat protection paste exceeds the shear bond strength requirement as suggested by Matsumura et al. (>10 MPa). A statistically significant association between the test groups and the type of failure was observed