Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments

Amara C Abreu-Serrano, Maria A. Loza, Augusto Elias, Siuli Mukhopadhyay, Stephen Warwick Looney, Frederick Rueggeberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Statement of problem: The ability of a resin cement to bond to a restorative alloy is critical for maximal crown retention to nonideal preparations. Surface treatment and metal type may have an important role in optimizing resin-to-metal strength. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of surface pretreatment on the tensile strength of base and noble metals bonded using a conventional resin cement. Material and methods: Cylindrical plastic rods (9.5 mm in diameter), cast in base (Rexillium NBF) or noble metal (IPS d.SIGN 53), were divided into rods 10 mm in length (n=10-12). Specimens were heated in a porcelain furnace to create an oxide layer. Test specimens were further subjected to airborne-particle abrasion (50-μm Al2O3 particles) alone or with the application of a metal primer (Alloy Primer). Similarly treated rod ends were joined using resin cement (RelyX ARC), thermocycled (x500, 5°-55°C) and stored (24 hours, 37°C) before debonding using a universal testing machine. Debond strength and failure site were recorded. Rank-based ANOVA for unbalanced designs was used to test for significant interaction (α=.050). Each pair of treatments was compared separately for each metal (Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of .0083, overall error rate for comparisons, .05). The 2 metals were compared separately for each of the 3 treatments using an adjusted significance level of .017, maintaining an overall error rate of .05. A multinomial logit model was used to describe the effect of metal type and surface pretreatment on failure site location (α=.05). Results: Interaction between metal type and surface pretreatment was significant for stress values (P=.019). Metal type did not significantly affect tensile bond strength for any of the compared surface pretreatments. Metal primer significantly improved tensile bond strength for each metal type. Most failures tended to occur as either adhesive or mixed in nature. Conclusions: Metal primer application significantly enhanced tensile bond strength to base and noble metal. No significant differences in tensile strength were found between alloys. Differences in failure site incidence were found to be related to metal type and surface pretreatment. (J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:107-118).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)107-118
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume101
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2009

Fingerprint

Resin Cements
Tensile Strength
Metals
Adhesive cement
Dental Porcelain
Crowns
Adhesives
Oxides
Plastics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments. / Abreu-Serrano, Amara C; Loza, Maria A.; Elias, Augusto; Mukhopadhyay, Siuli; Looney, Stephen Warwick; Rueggeberg, Frederick.

In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, Vol. 101, No. 2, 01.02.2009, p. 107-118.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{49bdad871b96475da268fadefefb0478,
title = "Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments",
abstract = "Statement of problem: The ability of a resin cement to bond to a restorative alloy is critical for maximal crown retention to nonideal preparations. Surface treatment and metal type may have an important role in optimizing resin-to-metal strength. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of surface pretreatment on the tensile strength of base and noble metals bonded using a conventional resin cement. Material and methods: Cylindrical plastic rods (9.5 mm in diameter), cast in base (Rexillium NBF) or noble metal (IPS d.SIGN 53), were divided into rods 10 mm in length (n=10-12). Specimens were heated in a porcelain furnace to create an oxide layer. Test specimens were further subjected to airborne-particle abrasion (50-μm Al2O3 particles) alone or with the application of a metal primer (Alloy Primer). Similarly treated rod ends were joined using resin cement (RelyX ARC), thermocycled (x500, 5°-55°C) and stored (24 hours, 37°C) before debonding using a universal testing machine. Debond strength and failure site were recorded. Rank-based ANOVA for unbalanced designs was used to test for significant interaction (α=.050). Each pair of treatments was compared separately for each metal (Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of .0083, overall error rate for comparisons, .05). The 2 metals were compared separately for each of the 3 treatments using an adjusted significance level of .017, maintaining an overall error rate of .05. A multinomial logit model was used to describe the effect of metal type and surface pretreatment on failure site location (α=.05). Results: Interaction between metal type and surface pretreatment was significant for stress values (P=.019). Metal type did not significantly affect tensile bond strength for any of the compared surface pretreatments. Metal primer significantly improved tensile bond strength for each metal type. Most failures tended to occur as either adhesive or mixed in nature. Conclusions: Metal primer application significantly enhanced tensile bond strength to base and noble metal. No significant differences in tensile strength were found between alloys. Differences in failure site incidence were found to be related to metal type and surface pretreatment. (J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:107-118).",
author = "Abreu-Serrano, {Amara C} and Loza, {Maria A.} and Augusto Elias and Siuli Mukhopadhyay and Looney, {Stephen Warwick} and Frederick Rueggeberg",
year = "2009",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60004-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "101",
pages = "107--118",
journal = "Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry",
issn = "0022-3913",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments

AU - Abreu-Serrano, Amara C

AU - Loza, Maria A.

AU - Elias, Augusto

AU - Mukhopadhyay, Siuli

AU - Looney, Stephen Warwick

AU - Rueggeberg, Frederick

PY - 2009/2/1

Y1 - 2009/2/1

N2 - Statement of problem: The ability of a resin cement to bond to a restorative alloy is critical for maximal crown retention to nonideal preparations. Surface treatment and metal type may have an important role in optimizing resin-to-metal strength. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of surface pretreatment on the tensile strength of base and noble metals bonded using a conventional resin cement. Material and methods: Cylindrical plastic rods (9.5 mm in diameter), cast in base (Rexillium NBF) or noble metal (IPS d.SIGN 53), were divided into rods 10 mm in length (n=10-12). Specimens were heated in a porcelain furnace to create an oxide layer. Test specimens were further subjected to airborne-particle abrasion (50-μm Al2O3 particles) alone or with the application of a metal primer (Alloy Primer). Similarly treated rod ends were joined using resin cement (RelyX ARC), thermocycled (x500, 5°-55°C) and stored (24 hours, 37°C) before debonding using a universal testing machine. Debond strength and failure site were recorded. Rank-based ANOVA for unbalanced designs was used to test for significant interaction (α=.050). Each pair of treatments was compared separately for each metal (Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of .0083, overall error rate for comparisons, .05). The 2 metals were compared separately for each of the 3 treatments using an adjusted significance level of .017, maintaining an overall error rate of .05. A multinomial logit model was used to describe the effect of metal type and surface pretreatment on failure site location (α=.05). Results: Interaction between metal type and surface pretreatment was significant for stress values (P=.019). Metal type did not significantly affect tensile bond strength for any of the compared surface pretreatments. Metal primer significantly improved tensile bond strength for each metal type. Most failures tended to occur as either adhesive or mixed in nature. Conclusions: Metal primer application significantly enhanced tensile bond strength to base and noble metal. No significant differences in tensile strength were found between alloys. Differences in failure site incidence were found to be related to metal type and surface pretreatment. (J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:107-118).

AB - Statement of problem: The ability of a resin cement to bond to a restorative alloy is critical for maximal crown retention to nonideal preparations. Surface treatment and metal type may have an important role in optimizing resin-to-metal strength. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of surface pretreatment on the tensile strength of base and noble metals bonded using a conventional resin cement. Material and methods: Cylindrical plastic rods (9.5 mm in diameter), cast in base (Rexillium NBF) or noble metal (IPS d.SIGN 53), were divided into rods 10 mm in length (n=10-12). Specimens were heated in a porcelain furnace to create an oxide layer. Test specimens were further subjected to airborne-particle abrasion (50-μm Al2O3 particles) alone or with the application of a metal primer (Alloy Primer). Similarly treated rod ends were joined using resin cement (RelyX ARC), thermocycled (x500, 5°-55°C) and stored (24 hours, 37°C) before debonding using a universal testing machine. Debond strength and failure site were recorded. Rank-based ANOVA for unbalanced designs was used to test for significant interaction (α=.050). Each pair of treatments was compared separately for each metal (Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of .0083, overall error rate for comparisons, .05). The 2 metals were compared separately for each of the 3 treatments using an adjusted significance level of .017, maintaining an overall error rate of .05. A multinomial logit model was used to describe the effect of metal type and surface pretreatment on failure site location (α=.05). Results: Interaction between metal type and surface pretreatment was significant for stress values (P=.019). Metal type did not significantly affect tensile bond strength for any of the compared surface pretreatments. Metal primer significantly improved tensile bond strength for each metal type. Most failures tended to occur as either adhesive or mixed in nature. Conclusions: Metal primer application significantly enhanced tensile bond strength to base and noble metal. No significant differences in tensile strength were found between alloys. Differences in failure site incidence were found to be related to metal type and surface pretreatment. (J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:107-118).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=58349121454&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=58349121454&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60004-4

DO - 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60004-4

M3 - Article

VL - 101

SP - 107

EP - 118

JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

SN - 0022-3913

IS - 2

ER -