| Autor: |
Hanan Fathy, Hamdi H. Hamama, Noha El-Wassefy, Salah H. Mahmoud |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2022 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
BMC Oral Health, Vol 22, Iss 1, Pp 1-15 (2022) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
1472-6831 |
| DOI: |
10.1186/s12903-022-02674-5 |
| Popis: |
Abstract Background Evaluating the effect of different surface treatment methods on the micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) of two different resin-matrix computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramics (RMCs). Methods A standardized inlay preparations were performed on 100 intact maxillary premolars. According to the type of the restorative material, the teeth were randomly divided into two equally sized groups (n = 50): (polymer-infiltrated ceramic (Vita Enamic) and resin-based composites (Lava Ultimate)). The inlays were fabricated using CAD/CAM technology. In each group, the specimens were randomly assigned to five subgroups (n = 10) according to the surface treatment method: group 1 used was the control group (no surface treatment); group 2, was treated with air abrasion with 50 μm Al2O3 (A) and universal adhesive (UA); group 3, was treated with air abrasion with 50 μm Al2O3 (A) and silane coupling agent (S); group 4, was treated with hydrofluoric acid (HF) and universal adhesive (UA) and group 5, was treated with Hydrofluoric acid (HF) + silane coupling agent (S). The inlays were then cemented to their respective preparations using dual-cure self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U200, 3 M ESPE) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The µTBS test was conducted in all groups, and stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope were used to inspect the failure mode. The data were statistically analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s post-hoc multiple comparison tests at a significance level of p |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink