Effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of milled polyetheretherketone posts

Attia, Mazen A.; Shokry, Tamer E.; Abdelaziz, M. H.

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.08.033

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study, while the atmospheric cold plasma discharge was significantly improved the bond strength of ILC materials to the PAEK polymers (p < 0.05), no significant alteration detected for LDC groups (p > 0.05). In parallel to the result of the present study, atmospheric cold plasma application has been declared an effective surface treatment technique to improve the bond strength of resin-based materials to PAEK polymers [15,28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…The plasma application on a non-polar PAEK polymer surface improves as polar by creating functional groups containing oxygen, such as the carboxyl (C = O) and hydroxyl (-OH) radicals [15]. These functional groups trigger a reaction in the methacrylate-based adhesive systems to create a covalent bond between the adhesive and polymer [15,22,28]. In the present study, while the atmospheric cold plasma discharge was significantly improved the bond strength of ILC materials to the PAEK polymers (p < 0.05), no significant alteration detected for LDC groups (p > 0.05).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing the shear bond strength of veneering materials to the PAEKs after surface treatments

Kılıç¹,

Dede

Küçükekenci

2023

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to evaluate the impact of various surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) polymers to indirect laboratory composite (ILC) and lithium disilicate ceramic (LDC) veneering materials. Methods Polymer specimens (7 × 7x2 mm) were sectioned from PEEK and PEKK discs (N = 294) and randomly allocated to 7 groups (n = 20); untreated (Cnt), plasma (Pls), 98% sulfuric acid (Sa), sandblasting with 110 µm Al2O3 (Sb), tribochemical silica coating with 110 µm silica modified Al2O3 (Tbc), Sb + Sa, Tbc + Sa. Scanning electron microscopy assessments were performed on one sample of each treatment group, and veneering materials were applied to the remaining specimens (n = 10). The specimens were subjected to the SBS test after being soaked in distilled water (24 h, 37 °C). Three-way ANOVA, independent sample t-test, and Tukey HSD test were performed for statistical analyses (α = .05). Results The surface treatment, polymer, veneering material types, and their interactions were significant on SBS results according to the 3-way ANOVA (p < 0.001). The SBS values of ILC veneered groups were significantly higher than LDC groups, regardless of surface treatment and polymer type (p < 0.05). The highest SBS values were obtained for Sa-applied ILC veneered PEEK (21.55 ± 1.45 MPa) and PEKK (17.04 ± 1.99 MPa) polymer groups (p < 0.05). Conclusion The effect of surface treatment and veneering materials may be significant on the SBS values of PAEKs. Therefore, the application parameters of surface treatments should be more specified for the applied veneering material and polymer type.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the shear bond strength of veneering materials to the PAEKs after surface treatments

Kılıç¹,

Dede

Küçükekenci

2023

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, prostheses with rough surfaces are not considered to be aesthetically pleasing [24]. In addition, the fit of a prosthesis may be poor due to its rough surface, which is the most important factor in clinical situations [25]. This is because if the rough surface of the prosthesis is placed in the mouth, it may act as an undercut and the possibility of an inaccurate prosthesis margin increases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Washing Condition on the Fracture Strength, and the Degree of Conversion of 3D Printing Resin

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared the surface roughness, contact angle, surface energy, residual monomers, degree of conversion, and flexural strength of 3D-printed dental resin under various washing conditions. The specimens were printed with a digital light processing (DLP) printer and were divided into four groups: the group dipped in IPA for 5 s (IPA-D), the group washed in IPA for 1 min (IPA-1), the group washed in IPA for 10 min (IPA-10), and the group washed with TPM for 10 min (TPM-10). Following, the groups were redivided into two groups: a cured group and an uncured group. All experimental data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s test. In all groups, the surface roughness showed a value of 1.2–1.8 μm, with no significant difference (p > 0.05). Contact angle showed a significant difference between the three groups using IPA and the TPM group, whereby the TPM-washed specimen showed a low contact angle (p < 0.05). The degree of conversion (DOC) increased in the following order: IPA-D group, IPA-1 group, IPA-10 group, and TPM-10 group, exhibiting a significant difference between all groups (p < 0.05). Flexural strength was measured at 110–130 MPa in all groups, with no significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). The washing time and washing solution type of the 3D printing material had no significant effect on surface roughness and flexural strength.

show abstract

“…Variations in manufacturing techniques exert a significant effect on margin precision. Pressed PEEK exhibited a larger marginal gap than computer-aided design (CAD)-and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)-milled PEEK, both of which stayed within the clinical acceptance limit [14]. As yet, only a few studies have been dedicated to examining the differences among various fabrication technologies, and further research is required.…”

Section: Crownsmentioning

confidence: 99%

PEEK in Fixed Dental Prostheses: Application and Adhesion Improvement

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been widely applied in fixed dental prostheses, comprising crowns, fixed partial dentures, and post-and-core. PEEK’s excellent mechanical properties facilitate better stress distribution than conventional materials, protecting the abutment teeth. However, the stiffness of PEEK is not sufficient, which can be improved via fiber reinforcement. PEEK is biocompatible. It is nonmutagenic, noncytotoxic, and nonallergenic. However, the chemical stability of PEEK is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, PEEK is nondegradable and intraoral corrosion is minimized. On the other hand, the inert surface makes adhesive bonding difficult. Numerous strategies for improving the adhesive properties of PEEK have been explored, including acid etching, plasma treatment, airborne particle abrasion, laser treatment, and adhesive systems.

show abstract

Effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of milled polyetheretherketone posts

Cited by 28 publications

References 35 publications

Comparing the shear bond strength of veneering materials to the PAEKs after surface treatments

Comparing the shear bond strength of veneering materials to the PAEKs after surface treatments

Effect of Washing Condition on the Fracture Strength, and the Degree of Conversion of 3D Printing Resin

PEEK in Fixed Dental Prostheses: Application and Adhesion Improvement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About