Adhesive Bonding to Computer-aided Design/ Computer-aided Manufacturing Esthetic Dental Materials: An Overview.

AIM: To review the adhesive bonding to different computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) esthetic restorative materials. BACKGROUND: The use of CAD/CAM esthetic restorative materials has gained popularity in recent years. Several CAD/ CAM esthetic restorative materials are commercially available. Adhesive bonding is a major determinant of success of CAD/ CAM restorations. Review result: An account of the currently available bonding strategies are discussed with their rationale in various CAD/ CAM materials. CONCLUSION: Different surface treatment methods as well as adhesion promoters can be used to achieve reliable bonding of CAD/CAM restorative materials. Selection of bonding strategy to such material is determined based on its composition. Further evidence is required to evaluate the effect of new surface treatment methods, such as nonthermal atmospheric plasma and self-etching ceramic primer on bonding to different dental ceramics. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: An understanding of the currently available bonding strategies to CA/CAM materials can help the clinician to select the most indicated system for each category of materials.

The impact of PEEK pretreatment using H2SO4, riboflavin, and aluminum trioxide on the extrusion bond strength to canal dentin luted with Polymethyl methacrylate and resin-based composite cement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of various surface pretreatment methods, including H2SO4, Riboflavin, and Al2O3, as well as different luting cement types, namely Methyl Methacrylate based Cement (MMBC) and composite-based cement (CBC), on the extrusion bond strength (EBS) of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) posts bonded to canal dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study involved 120 single-rooted human premolar teeth that underwent endodontic treatment. Following root canal preparation, PEEK posts were fabricated from PEEK blanks using a CAD-CAM system, resulting in a total of 120 posts. The posts were randomly assigned to one of four groups based on their post-surface conditioning: Group A H2SO4, Group B RF, Group C Al2O3, and Group D (NC), each consisting of 30 posts. Within each group, there were two subgroups based on the type of luting cement used for bonding. Subgroups A1, B1, C1, and D1 (n=15 each) utilized CBC, while Subgroups A2, B2, C2, and D2 (n=15 each) used MMBC.The bond strength between the PEEK posts and root dentin was assessed using a universal testing machine, and the failure modes were examined under a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis, including one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's Post Hoc test with a significance level of p=0.05, was performed to analyze the data and evaluate the effects of surface treatment and luting cement type on the bond strength. RESULTS: Group B2, which underwent RF conditioning followed by Super-Bond C&B cement application, exhibited the highest bond strength scores at the coronal section (9.57±0.67 MPa). On the other hand, Group D1, which had no conditioning (NC) and used Panavia® V5 cement, showed the lowest EBS at the apical third (2.39±0.72 MPa). The overall results indicate that the different conditioning regimens and luting cement types did not significantly influence the bond strength of PEEK posts to root dentin (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Riboflavin activated by photodynamic therapy (PDT) and H2SO4 can be effective surface conditioners for PEEK posts. These treatments have shown potential for enhancing the bond strength between PEEK and resin cement. Additionally, the study revealed that MMA-based cement outperformed composite-based cement in terms of bond integrity with PEEK posts.

Post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill dental resin-composites.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill resin composites through using Vickers hardness profiles (VHN). METHODS: Five bulk fill composite materials were examined: Tetric EvoCeram(®) Bulk Fill, X-tra base, Venus(®) Bulk Fill, Filtek™ Bulk Fill, SonicFill™. Three specimens of each material type were prepared in stainless steel molds which contained a slot of dimensions (15 mm × 4 mm × 2 mm), and a top plate. The molds were irradiated from one end. All specimens were stored at 37°C for 24h, before measurement. The Vickers hardness was measured as a function of depth of material, at 0.3mm intervals. Data were analysed by one-way ANOVA using Tukey post hoc tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: The maximum VHN ranged from 37.8 to 77.4, whilst the VHN at 80% of max.VHN ranged from 30.4 to 61.9. The depth corresponding to 80% of max.VHN, ranged from 4.14 to 5.03 mm. One-way ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between materials for all parameters tested. SonicFill exhibited the highest VHN (p<0.001) while Venus Bulk Fill the lowest (p≤0.001). SonicFill and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill had the greatest depth of cure (5.03 and 4.47 mm, respectively) and was significant's different from X-tra base, Venus Bulk Fill and Filtek Bulk Fill (p≤0.016). Linear regression confirmed a positive regression between max.VHN and filler loading (r(2)=0.94). SIGNIFICANCE: Bulk fill resin composites can be cured to an acceptable post-cure depth, according to the manufacturers' claims. SonicFill and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill had the greatest depth of cure among the composites examined.

Hygroscopic expansion kinetics of dental resin-composites.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the extent and rate of hygroscopic expansion of resin composites at 37°C. METHODS: Eight resin composites were examined: 1 micro-hybrid (Bright Light(®)), 5 nano-hybrids (Experimental Vertise™; Nanoceram-Bright(®); Tetric EvoCeram(®); Grandio(®) SO; Ceram X™ duo) and 2 flowables (X-tra base; Venus(®) Diamond Flow). Five disks (15 mm×2 mm) of each material were prepared. The mean change in specimen diameter was recorded by a custom-built non-contact laser micrometer. Specimens were initially measured dry and then at fixed time intervals, over 150 days, after storage in distilled water at 37±1°C. Data were re-expressed in volumetric terms and analysed by repeated measures ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (α=0.05). RESULTS: The volumetric hygroscopic expansion ranged from 0.58 to 2.26 and can be considered in three bands. First, Experimental Vertise had the highest expansion (p<0.001). Venus Diamond Flow, Tetric EvoCeram and Ceram X duo were the second band. The third band, with still lower expansion, consisted of Bright light, Grandio So, Nanoceram-Bright and X-tra base, with no significant difference between them. CONCLUSION: For the size (2mm thickness) and shape of specimen measured, equilibrium was attained in all cases by 60 days. Within this set of resin-composites the equilibrium expansion varied by almost 400% of the lowest material.