Effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength between CAD/CAM bioceramic and resin blocks and orthodontic metal brackets bonded to each other

Influence of surface treatments and adhesive protocols on repair bond strength of glass‐matrix and resin‐matrix CAD/CAM ceramics

“…They were then embedded in self‐curing acrylic resin (Meliodent, Heraeus Kulzer) and polished with a polishing device (Mecatech 234 TCI‐10, Presi) using waterproof abrasive papers of 600‐, 800‐, and 1200‐grits, respectively. All specimens were soaked into an ultrasonic bath for 10 min and then exposed to 5000× thermal cycles of 5–55°C and 30 s dwelling time in deionized water, for artificial aging 7,16,39,40 . After the aging protocol, specimens were randomly separated into four main groups as follows: Control: no treatment was applied on the specimen surface. AL: Specimen surfaces were sandblasted from 10 mm above, with a sandblaster (Airsonic, mini sandblaster; Hager Werken) at a pressure of 1.5 bar using aluminum oxide powder (Cobra; 50 μm Al 2 O 3 , Renfert GmbH, Hilzingen, Germany).…”

“…The reliable and durable bonding of different materials to each other has long been a goal in the field of dentistry. To ensure adequate bond strength between inert restorative materials and resin composites, it is recommended to employ mechanical or chemical surface treatments 13–20 . These treatments aim to enhance the bonding capability by modifying the surface properties of the restorative materials.…”

“…As a result, Monobond Etch and Prime (MEP; Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) is introduced as a revolutionary self‐etching ceramic primer that can mildly etch with ammonium polyfluoride and silanize simultaneously with trimethoxypropyl methacrylate to increase bond strength 30–32 . Use of MEP is suggested especially for glass ceramics, but due to the disadvantages of sandblasting mentioned above, researchers also conducted studies on MEP's efficiency on resin‐matrix ceramics and found promising results which further should be investigated 14,16 . Researchers also reported that adhesive systems should be applied after surface treatments to enhance the repair bond strength 11,33 .…”

“…To ensure adequate bond strength between inert restorative materials and resin composites, it is recommended to employ mechanical or chemical surface treatments. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] These treatments aim to enhance the bonding capability by modifying the surface properties of the restorative materials. As a method of mechanical surface treatment, sandblasting with aluminum oxide (AL) has been used for years as a practical method, and it is recommended especially for resin-matrix ceramics.…”

“…[30][31][32] Use of MEP is suggested especially for glass ceramics, but due to the disadvantages of sandblasting mentioned above, researchers also conducted studies on MEP's efficiency on resin-matrix ceramics and found promising results which further should be investigated. 14,16 Researchers also reported that adhesive systems should be applied after surface treatments to enhance the repair bond strength. 11,33 However, conventional adhesive systems, that are silane-free, require technical sensitivity and more time due to several steps, whereas novel universal adhesives (UA) incorporated with silane reduce the application steps and simplify the clinical procedures.…”