Influence of Varied Silane Commercial Brands and Adhesive Application on Bond Strength and Stability to Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramic

Abstract

SUMMARY Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of various commercial silane brands with varied chemical compositions with or without the application of an adhesive layer on the microshear bond strength and durability of a resin luting agent to lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Methods and Materials: Lithium disilicate glass ceramic discs (EMX, IPS e.max Press, Ivoclar Vivadent) measuring 10 mm in diameter and 3 mm in thickness were fabricated (n=240). Surfaces were etched using 5% hydrofluoric acid and randomly assigned to 10 groups based on the commercial brand of silane used (n=24): [RP] RelyX Ceramic Primer (3M ESPE); [PS] Prosil (FGM); [SA] Silano (Angelus); [SM] Silano (Maquira); [SU] Silane (Ultradent); [GL] GLUMA Ceramic Primer (Kulzer); [CB] Ceramic Bond (VOCO); [MB] Monobond N (Ivoclar Vivadent); [CP] Clearfil Ceramic Primer (Kuraray); and [DE] 2-step silane (Dentsply Sirona). Half of the EMXs (n=12) received a thin adhesive layer (+) after the silane and prior to resin luting agent, while the other half (n=12) did not receive an adhesive layer (−). For the microshear bond strength test (μSBS), four light-cured resin luting agent cylinders (1 mm in diameter) were created on each EMX surface. Half of these specimens were tested after 24 hours, while the other half were stored in deionized water for 6 months. The μSBS test was conducted using a universal testing machine (DL 500, EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until failure. The obtained data underwent statistical analysis using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey test (α=0.05). Results: There was significant influence of the silane commercial brand on bond strength. Notably, “universal primers” yielded lower bond strength results compared to “pure” silane solutions. Water storage had a detrimental effect on microshear bond strength for certain silane commercial brands. Additionally, the application of an adhesive layer negatively impacted bond strength results for all silanes. Conclusions: This study confirms the importance of both silane commercial brand and chemical composition in relation to bond strength of resin luting agents to lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Furthermore, the application of an adhesive layer may have an adverse effect on bond stability over time.

Major outcomes of clinical and experimental studies to highlight the importance of using silane in composite resin restorations in modern dentistry: a systematic review

“…The composite resin to be used should be applied, choosing the appropriate material for each case [2,3]. Some work, analyzing the relevance of various chemical and mechanical treatments in old composite resins and repair bond strength, concluded that the improvement in the bond strength between the new and the old composite resin restoration requires increased harshness to institute micromechanical union between the surface of the old composite resin and the resin together [4,5].…”

“…The use of drills, followed by acid etching and application of adhesive, appears to be used by more than 80% of dentists as a pre-treatment of the old composite to be repaired. In vitro data can help elucidate whether silane treatment of composite resin surfaces before repair is indispensable [3][4][5].…”