In spite of high mechanical strength, zirconia-based ceramics (ZrO 2 ) has poor bond strength after conventional bond cementation procedures, requiring different surface treatment methods (STMs). This review gathered information about the STM for adhesive cementation (AC) to ZrO 2 in the PubMed database, considering in vitro studies pertaining to AC for acid-resistant ceramics (ZrO 2 ) limited to peer-reviewed papers published in English between 1965 and 2013 in dental journals. Different STMs have been proposed for ZrO 2 : air-abrasion (laboratory or chairside) with silica-(Si-) coated aluminum particles, the use of materials containing phosphate monomers, primer or silane application, laser irradiation, Si vapor phase deposition, and selective infiltration etching. In conclusion, STMs improve bond strength of resin luting cement to ZrO 2 mainly when tested in short time. STMs must be correlated to the type of ZrO 2 and the resin cement.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the flexural strength of acrylic resin bars by varying the types of resin polymerization and reinforcement methods. Fourteen groups (N = 10) were created by the interaction of factors in study: type of resin (self-cured (SC) or heat-cured (HC)) and reinforcement method (industrialized glass fiber (Ind), unidirectional glass fiber (Uni), short glass fiber (Short), unidirectional and short glass fiber (Uni-Short), thermoplastic resin fiber (Tpl), and steel wire (SW)). Reinforced bars (25 × 2 × 2 mm) were tested in flexural strength (0.5 mm/min) and examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data (MPa) were submitted to factorial analysis, ANOVA, and Tukey and T-student tests (a = 5%) showing significant interaction (P = 0.008), for SC: Uni (241.71 ± 67.77)a, Uni-Short (221.05 ± 71.97)a, Ind (215.21 ± 46.59)ab, SW (190.51 ± 31.49)abc, Short (156.31 ± 28.76)bcd, Tpl (132.51 ± 20.21)cd, Control SC (101.47 ± 19.79)d and for HC: Ind (268.93 ± 105.65)a, Uni (215.14 ± 67.60)ab, Short (198.44 ± 95.27)abc, Uni-Short (189.56 ± 92.27)abc, Tpl (161.32 ± 62.51)cd, SW (106.69 ± 28.70)cd, and Control HC (93.39 ± 39.61)d. SEM analysis showed better fiber-resin interaction for HC. Nonimpregnated fibers, irrespective of their length, tend to improve fracture strength of acrylics.

This study evaluated the influence of silane heat treatment and glass fiber fabrication type, industrially treated (I) or pure (P), on flexural and compressive strength of methacrylate resin bars (BISGMA/TEGDMA, 50/50%). Six groups (n = 10) were created: I-sil: I/silanated; P-sil: P-silanated; I-sil/heat: I/silanated heated to 100°; P-sil/heat: P/silanated heated to 100°; (I: I/not silanated; and P: P/not silanated. Specimens were prepared for flexural strength (10 × 2 × 1 mm) and for compressive strength 9.5 × 5.5 × 3 mm) and tested at 0.5 mm/min. Statistical analysis demonstrated the following for flexural strength (P < 0.05): I-sil: 155.89 ± 45.27BC; P-sil: 155.89 ± 45.27BC; I-sil/heat: 130.20 ± 22.11C; P-sil/heat: 169.86 ± 50.29AB; I: 131.87 ± 15.86C. For compressive strength, the following are demonstrated: I-sil: 1367.25 ± 188.77ab; P-sil: 867.61 ± 102.76d; I-sil/heat: 1162.98 ± 222.07c; P-sil/heat: 1499.35 ± 339.06a; and I: 1245.78 ± 211.16bc. Due to the impossibility of incorporating the stipulated amount of fiber, P group was excluded. Glass fiber treatment with heated silane enhanced flexural and compressive strength of a reinforced dental methacrylate.

Increasing fiber content results in higher flexural and diametral tensile strength of an experimental composite reinforced with glass fibers.

The aim is to evaluate the flexural strength of acrylic resin bars depending on the addiction of glass fibers with or without previous 3-methacryloxypropyl-trimethoxysilane (silane) application. Short fibers (3 mm) were treated and added to an acrylic resin powder, being further mixed with acrylic liquid to create bars (25 × 2 × 2 mm) of 11 experimental groups (N = 10), according to the interaction of experimental factors: weight % of glass fibers: (0.5; 1; 3; 4; 6 and 7) and silane application (with silane (S) or without silane (N)). Flexural strength and scanning microscopy evaluation were performed (SEM). Data (MPa) were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey (α = 5%). A significant difference between groups was observed (p = 0.001): S7%(128.85 ± 35.76)a, S6% (119.31 ± 11.97)ab, S4% (116.98 ± 25.23)ab, N4% (107.85 ± 24.88)abc, S1% (96.29 ± 20.65)bc, S0.5% (89.29 ± 7.33)cd, S3% (89.0 ± 11.27)cd, N3% (86.79 ± 17.63)cd, N1% (85.43 ± 16.44)cd, Control (73.29 ± 25.0)de, N0.5% (59.58 ± 19.46)e. For N groups, it was not possible to include more than 4%wt fibers. SEM showed better fiber-resin interaction for S groups, and fractures around fibers on N groups. Previous silane application enables the addiction of greater quantity of glass fibers and better interaction with the acrylic resin resulting in higher flexural strength. Without silane, fibers seem to act as initial crack points due to poor interaction.