Publicação
Reparability of two different CAD/CAM polymer materials using a light-cured composite and universal adhesives
| Resumo: | Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reparability of two different CAD/CAM polymer materials, polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and polyoxymethylene (POM) by assessing the shear bond strength (SBS) of a light-cured composite, using four different adhesive systems. Materials and Methods: Eighty blocks of PMMA and eighty blocks of POM, with 7 mm of diameter and 4 mm height, were milled by the manufacturer. The top surface of all specimens was abraded with 50 μm Al2O3 and after, ultrasonically cleaned in an ethanol ultrasonic bath for 5 minutes. The 80 specimens of each material were randomly allocated to four experimental groups (n=20) according to the different adhesive system used: OptiBond™ XTR (KerrTM, Italia) Futurabond® M+ (VOCO GmbH, Germany), ScotchbondTM Universal (3M ESPE, Germany) or OptiBond™ Solo Plus (KerrTM, Italia). The bonding area was customized using a perforated adhesive tape with round-shaped orifices (3 mm diameter) and each adhesive was applied according to the manufacturer´s recommendations. The repairing composite resin Grandio®SO (VOCO GmbH, Germany), was applied according the manufacturer’s instructions, and polymerized during 10 seconds (1000 mW/cm2). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 48 hours before the SBS was tested and failure modes were assessed. Results: The mean SBS yielded with PMMA specimens was significantly higher than with POM. There were no statistical differences between adhesive systems. No cohesive failure was obtained, with the POM specimens having mostly adhesive failures, in contrast with the PMMA with mostly mixed failures and no significant difference was identified between adhesives. Conclusion: It is possible to achieve an adequate adhesion bond to POM and PMMA. SBS values were higher in PMMA specimens than to POM but no differences were found between adhesive systems. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Rosca, Bianca Andrada |
| Assunto: | Materiais dentários Adesivos dentários Teses de mestrado - 2016 |
| Ano: | 2016 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | dissertação de mestrado |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
| Resumo: | Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reparability of two different CAD/CAM polymer materials, polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and polyoxymethylene (POM) by assessing the shear bond strength (SBS) of a light-cured composite, using four different adhesive systems. Materials and Methods: Eighty blocks of PMMA and eighty blocks of POM, with 7 mm of diameter and 4 mm height, were milled by the manufacturer. The top surface of all specimens was abraded with 50 μm Al2O3 and after, ultrasonically cleaned in an ethanol ultrasonic bath for 5 minutes. The 80 specimens of each material were randomly allocated to four experimental groups (n=20) according to the different adhesive system used: OptiBond™ XTR (KerrTM, Italia) Futurabond® M+ (VOCO GmbH, Germany), ScotchbondTM Universal (3M ESPE, Germany) or OptiBond™ Solo Plus (KerrTM, Italia). The bonding area was customized using a perforated adhesive tape with round-shaped orifices (3 mm diameter) and each adhesive was applied according to the manufacturer´s recommendations. The repairing composite resin Grandio®SO (VOCO GmbH, Germany), was applied according the manufacturer’s instructions, and polymerized during 10 seconds (1000 mW/cm2). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 48 hours before the SBS was tested and failure modes were assessed. Results: The mean SBS yielded with PMMA specimens was significantly higher than with POM. There were no statistical differences between adhesive systems. No cohesive failure was obtained, with the POM specimens having mostly adhesive failures, in contrast with the PMMA with mostly mixed failures and no significant difference was identified between adhesives. Conclusion: It is possible to achieve an adequate adhesion bond to POM and PMMA. SBS values were higher in PMMA specimens than to POM but no differences were found between adhesive systems. |
|---|