Bond strength and microleakage of porcelain repair materials

Ferrando, Jean-Marc P.; Graser, Gerald N.; Tallents, Ross H.; Jarvis, Ronald H.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(85)90471-8

Cited by 31 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, controversy has also prevailed regarding the shelf life of silane products and their stability as well as durability in a wet, oral environment. The effect of thermocycling and water storage has been shown to decrease the bond strength of earlier systems significantly ( Myerson, 1969; Bello et al ., 1985 ; Gregory, Hagen & Power, 1988). Newer generations of bonding systems having different components with various silane primers and luting agents have recently been marketed and reported for bonding porcelain and ceramic restorations ( Diaz‐Arnold & Aquilino, 1990; Wolf, Powers & O'Keefe, 1992; Appeldoorn, Wilwerding & Barkmeier, 1993; Berksun & Saglam, 1994; Della Bona & Northeast, 1994; Kato et al ., 1996 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of water storage on the silanization in porcelain repair strength

Berry¹,

Chung²

1999

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the long-term water storage affect of silanization on shear bond strength of composite resin to porcelain. One hundred and sixty square-shaped specimens were fabricated and sanded flat sequentially with silicone carbide papers. The specimens were then placed into four groups and 16 subgroups of 10 specimens each randomly. Four commercially available silane systems, two one-mix and two two-mix, were tested in this study. Teflon tubes with an internal diameter of 2.97 mm and 2 mm in height were filled with a dual cure composite resin (Mirage FLC), placed on the silanated surfaces and light-cured for 120 s. Specimens were stored in room temperature water and subjected to shear bond strength testing after 24 h, 1 week, 1 month and 3 month periods of immersion. An Instron Universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min was used for the testing. The mean values of the shear bond strengths ranged from 4.38 MPa (24-h period) to 23.90 MPa (3-month period). ANOVA and Scheffe' tests were used to analyse data with confidence level at 95%. All groups recorded an increase in bond strength after one week as compared with the 24-h period (P<0.05). With the exception of a one-mix system, all systems showed significantly higher bond strength at 3 weeks as compared with the 24-h and 1-week water storage periods. In conclusion, bond strength of composite resin to porcelain resulting from silanization of porcelain increased during the experimental period. The bond strength also varied for different silanes used in this study.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of water storage on the silanization in porcelain repair strength

Berry¹,

Chung²

1999

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As per the studies done earlier shear bond strength of composite to porcelain with various porcelain repair systems have been reported in the range of 6–29.9 MPa. [ 11 12 13 17 18 19 ] Data presented in literature has shown the bond strength of ceramic to metal substrates in the range of 43–71 MPa. [ 20 21 ] and a sufficient bond for metal-ceramic has been accepted when the fracture stress is >25 MPa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing two intraoral porcelain repair systems for shear bond strength in repaired cohesive and adhesive fractures, for porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations: An in vitro study

Yadav

Dabas

Bhargava

et al. 2019

J Indian Prosthodont Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The objective of research was to evaluate the shear bond strength of two commercially available intraoral porcelain repair systems, Clearfil repair system (Kuraray) and P and R repair system (Shofu) for repairing cohesive and adhesive fracture in metal-ceramic restorations. Settings and Design: In vivo – comparative study. Materials and Methods: Ninety samples of Nickel–Chromium metal discs were fabricated. Each disc was veneered with 2 mm thickness of ceramic material using custom made metal jig. Samples were divided into control (Group I n = 10) and two test groups (Group II n = 40 and Group III n = 40). Adhesive and cohesive fractures were created in test group samples, Group II (Ceramic substrate or cohesive defect) and Group III (metal substrate or adhesive defect). The samples of ceramic substrate (Group II) and metal substrate (Group III) were further subdivided into A and B containing 20 samples each according to the repair material used (A; Clearfil porcelain repair system and B; P and R porcelain repair system). All specimens were subjected to a standard shear load in the UTM until fracture occurred. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and post hoc Bonferroni test. Statistical Analysis used: One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Bonferroni test. Results: Clearfil repair system showed significantly higher shear bond strength value (29.16 Mpa) as compared to P and R repair system (27.23 Mpa) for cohesive fractures. Whereas if compared for repairing adhesive fractures P and R repair system had significantly higher shear bond strength values (26.59 Mpa) than Clearfil repair system (25.74 Mpa). Conclusions: From the present study, it was be concluded that for cohesive fracture Clearfil repair system is a better material and for adhesive fractures P and R repair material gives better results.

show abstract

“…[ 9 ] The masticatory forces between the incisors vary between 155 and 222 N and upto 830 N for molars. [ 10 ] Since the strength is directly proportional to the masticatory forces and inversely proportional to area (Strength = F/A), it may be assumed that minimum bond strength required for intraoral repair material is 8–9 MPa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of shear bond strength of two porcelain repair systems after different surface treatment

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Intraoral chair side porcelain repair system is a quick, painless and highly patient acceptable procedure, without removal of restoration or fabrication of new restoration. There are very limited studies conducted to evaluate the shear bond strength of repair systems after different surface treatment.Objectives of Research:The objective of research was to evaluate the shear bond strength of two intraoral porcelain repair systems Clearfil repair system (Kuraray) and Ceramic repair system (Ivoclar) to repair metal-ceramic restoration after three different surface treatment.Materials and Methods:Totally, 120 discs of base metal alloy were fabricated. The opaque, dentine and enamel of ceramic were applied to achieve the uniform thickness. Defect was created, and repair was done using two repair systems after different surface treatment. Shear bond strength was measured.Results:Analysis of variance was utilized. Ceramic repair system after 40% phosphoric acid surface treatment showed the highest mean value and Clearfil repair system after surface treatment with 37% phosphoric acid showed the lowest. The statistical difference was found to be significant between the groups.Conclusion:The shear bond strength of Ceramic repair system with 40% phosphoric acid etching showed highest shear bond strength as compared to other system and surface treatment used in the study.

show abstract

Bond strength and microleakage of porcelain repair materials

Cited by 31 publications

References 9 publications

Effect of water storage on the silanization in porcelain repair strength

Effect of water storage on the silanization in porcelain repair strength

Comparing two intraoral porcelain repair systems for shear bond strength in repaired cohesive and adhesive fractures, for porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations: An in vitro study

Comparison of shear bond strength of two porcelain repair systems after different surface treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About