Microtensile Bond Strength of Cad-Cam and Pressed-Ceramic Inlays to Dentin

ABSTRACT

Objectives: CAD-CAM system is popular because of high esthetic and short fabrication time. But, there is limited information available about the microtensile bonding of luting cements to CAD-CAM inlays and to dentin. The aim of this study was to examine the bond strength of CAD-CAM (Cerec 3) and pressed-ceramic (IPS Empress 2) inlays to dentin surface by microtensile testing using two luting cements.

Materials and Methods: Standardized mesio-occlusal cavities were made in forty extracted molar teeth. An occlusal reduction of 2 mm was made; the bucco-lingual width of the proximal boxes was 4 mm, the occlusal width 3 mm and the depth of the pulpal and axial walls 2 mm. The proximal boxes were extended 1 mm below the cemento-enamel junction. Teeth were randomly assigned to 2 groups to evaluate the bonding of 2 ceramic systems, Cerec 3 (Group I) and IPS Empress 2 (Group II), to dentin. Each of the 2 groups were further divided into 2 luting cement groups, Panavia F (Group A) and Variolink II (Group B). After cementation, the teeth were sectioned into two 1.2x1.2 mm wide ‘I’ shape sections. The specimens were then subjected to microtensile testing at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Twoway ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were used to evaluate the results.

Results: The mean microtensile bond strengths of Cerec 3 and IPS Empress 2 bonding to dentin with luting agents in MPa were Panavia F (13.98±3.44), Variolink II (14.19±3.12) and Panavia F (15.12±3.15), Variolink II (15.45±3.08) respectively. No significant differences were found among the 2 ceramic systems (P>.05) and 2 luting cements with regard to dentin bond strengths (P>.05).

Conlusions: There was no difference found between the dentin bond strength of the Cerec 3 and IPS Empress 2 inlays cemented with two luting cements. (Eur J Dent 2007;2:91-96)

Key words

Dentin - Bond strength - Resin cements - Inlay - CAD-CAM - IPS Empress

• References

• 1 Sertgöz A, Gemalmaz D, Alkumru H. Luting composite thickness of two ceramic inlay systems.. Eur J Prost Rest Dent 1995; 4: 151-154
• 2 Qualtrough AJ, Wilson NH, Smith GA. Porcelain inlay: a historical view.. Oper Dent 1990; 15: 61-70
• 3 Dong JK, Luthy H, Wohlwend A, Scharer P. Heat-pressed ceramics: technology and strength.. Int J Prosthodont 1992; 5: 9-16
• 4 Addi S, Hedayati-Khams A, Poya A, Sjögren A. Interface gap size of manually and CAD/CAM manufactured ceramic inlays/ onlays in vitro.. J Dent 2002; 30: 53-58
• 5 Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Clinical performance of Cerec ceramic inlays: a systematic review.. Dent Mater 1999; 15: 54-61
• 6 Mormann WH, Brandestini M, Lutz F. The Cerec system: computer-assisted preparation of direct ceramic inlays in 1 setting.. Quintessence Int 1987; 38: 457-470
• 7 Jensen ME, Sheth JJ, Tolliver D. Etched porcelain resin bonded full veneer crowns. in vitro fracture resistance. Compend 1989; 21: 823-830
• 8 Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth.. Quintessence Int 1990; 21: 823-830
• 9 Llobell A, Nicholls JI, Kois JC, Daly CH. Fatigue life of porcelain repair systems.. Int J Prosthodont Res 1992; 5: 205-213
• 10 Russell DA, Meiers JC. Shear bond strength of resin composite to Dicor treated with 4-META.. Int J Prosthodont 1994; 7: 7-12
• 11 Kato H, Tanaka T, Atsuta M. Bond strength and durability of porcelain bonding systems.. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 163-168
• 12 Kamada K, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Effect of ceramic surface treatments on the bond of four resin luting agents to a ceramic material.. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79: 508-514
• 13 Schwartz RS, Summitt JB, Robbins JW, Santos JD. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry.. Quintessence Publishing Co; 2001. Inc. USA 0
• 14 Sano H, Shono T, Sonoda H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Carvalho R. et al Relationship between surface area for adhesion and tensile bond strength: Evaluation of a microtensile bond test. Dent Mater 1994; 10: 240-236
• 15 Schreiner RF, Chappell RP, Glaros AG, Eick JD. Microtensile testing of dentin adhesives.. Dent Mater 1998; 14: 194-201
• 16 Phrukkanon S, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The influence of cross-sectional shape and surface area on the microtensile bond test.. Dent Mater 1998; 14: 212-221
• 17 Uno S, Tanaka T, Kawamoto C, Konishi J, Sano H. Microtensile bond strength to dentin and cavity adaptation of Cerec 2 inlay restoration.. Am J Dent 2000; 13: 59-63
• 18 Tanumiharja M, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems.. Dent Mater 2000; 16: 180-187
• 19 Inokoshi S, Van MeerbeekB, Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Marginal accuracy of CAD/CAM inlays made with the original and the updated software. J Dent 1992; 20: 171-177
• 20 Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH, Nkenke E, Petschelt A. In: Bond strength of five bonding composite resins to Cerec- Ceramic. Quintessence; Chicago: 1991: 567-575