Advertisement

Different surface modifications combined with universal adhesives: the impact on the bonding properties of zirconia to composite resin cement

  • Nina Lümkemann
  • Marlis Eichberger
  • Bogna StawarczykEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of plasma treatment and (universal adhesives) UAs on the bonding properties of zirconia.

Material and methods

Zirconia specimens (N = 744; n = 186/pretreatment) were prepared, highly polished, and pretreated: (i) plasma (oxygen plasma, 10s, 5 mm), (ii) airborne-particle abrasion (alumina, 50 μm, 0.05 MPa, 5 s, 10 mm), (iii) airborne-particle abrasion + plasma, and (iv) without pretreatment (highly polished surface). Surface roughness (Ra) and surface free energy (SFE) were measured (n = 6/pretreatment). Tensile bond strength (TBS) specimens (n = 180/pretreatment) were further divided (n = 18/conditioning): Clearfil Ceramic Primer (PCG), All-Bond Universal (ABU), Adhese Universal (AU), Clearfil Universal Bond (CUB), G-Premio Bond (GPB), Futurabond U (FBU), iBond Universal (IBU), One Coat 7 Universal (OCU), Scotchbond Universal (SBU), and no conditioning. PCG was luted with Panavia F2.0 and the remaining groups with DuoCem. After storage in distilled water (24 h; 37 °C) and thermocycling (5000×; 5 °C/55 °C), TBS was measured and fracture types (FTs) were determined. Data were analyzed using univariate ANOVA with a partial eta square (ƞP2), the Kruskal–Wallis H, the Mann–Whitney U, and the Chi2 test (P < .05).

Results

Plasma treatment resulted in an increase of SFE but had no impact on Ra. Airborne-particle abrasion resulted in the highest Ra and a higher TBS when compared with plasma and non-treatment. SBU and AU obtained a higher TBS when compared with PCG. OCU, FBU, ABU, IBU, and GPB indicated comparable TBS to PCG. CUB revealed the lowest TBS.

Conclusions

Plasma treatment cannot substitute airborne-particle abrasion when bonding zirconia but MDP-containing adhesives are essential for successful clinical outcomes.

Clinical relevance

Airborne-particle abrasion with a low pressure (0.05 MPa) in combination with UAs promotes the clinical success of adhesively bonded zirconia restorations.

Keywords

Zirconia Surface pretreatment Oxygen plasma Air-particle abrasion Universal adhesives Tensile bond strength Surface roughness Surface free energy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the material support given by 3M, Kuraray Medical and Coltène/Whaledent AG.

Funding

This study was partially financed by research grant ZF4052001MU5 AiF Projekt GmbH, ZIM-Kooperationsprojekte, Projektträger des BMWi.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by and of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Johansson C, Kmet G, Rivera J, Larsson C, Vult von Steyern P (2014) Fracture strength of monolithic all-ceramic crowns made of high translucent yttrium oxide-stabilized zirconium dioxide compared to porcelain-veneered crowns and lithium disilicate crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 72:145–153.  https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2013.822098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang Y, Lee JJ-W, Srikanth R, Lawn BR (2013) Edge chipping and flexural resistance of monolithic ceramics. Dent Mater 29:1201–1208.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.09.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bömicke W, Rammelsberg P, Stober T, Schmitter M (2017) Short-term prospective clinical evaluation of monolithic and partially veneered zirconia single crowns. J Esthet Restor Dent 29:22–30.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sax C, Hämmerle CHF, Sailer I (2011) 10-year clinical outcomes of fixed dental prostheses with zirconia frameworks. Int J Comput Dent 14:183–202Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rinke S, Gersdorff N, Lange K, Roediger M (2013) Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 7-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont 26:164–171.  https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tartaglia GM, Sidoti E, Sforza C (2015) Seven-year prospective clinical study on zirconia-based single crowns and fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig 19:1137–1145.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1330-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lops D, Mosca D, Casentini P, Ghisolfi M, Romeo E (2012) Prognosis of zirconia ceramic fixed partial dentures: a 7-year prospective study. Int J Prosthodont 25:21–23Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vigolo P, Mutinelli S (2012) Evaluation of zirconium-oxide-based ceramic single-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) generated with two CAD/CAM systems compared to porcelain-fused-to-metal single-unit posterior FDPs: a 5-year clinical prospective study. J Prosthodont 21:265–269.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00825.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ortorp A, Kihl ML, Carlsson GE (2012) A 5-year retrospective study of survival of zirconia single crowns fitted in a private clinical setting. J Dent 40:527–530.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sailer I, Balmer M, Hüsler J et al (2017) Comparison of fixed dental prostheses with zirconia and metal frameworks: five-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont 30:426–428.  https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5183 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edelhoff D, Ozcan M (2007) To what extent does the longevity of fixed dental prostheses depend on the function of the cement? Working group 4 materials: cementation. Clin Oral Implants Res 18(Suppl 3):193–204.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01442.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kern M (2015) Bonding to oxide ceramics—laboratory testing versus clinical outcome. Dent Mater 31:8–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.06.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kern M, Wegner SM (1998) Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability. Dent Mater 14:64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Özcan M, Bernasconi M (2015) Adhesion to zirconia used for dental restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent 17:7–26.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a33525 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blatz MB, Vonderheide M, Conejo J (2017) The effect of resin bonding on long-term success of high-strength ceramics. J Dent Res 22034517729134.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034517729134
  16. 16.
    Blatz MB (2002) Long-term clinical success of all-ceramic posterior restorations. Quintessence Int 33:415–426Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thompson JY, Stoner BR, Piascik JR, Smith R (2011) Adhesion/cementation to zirconia and other non-silicate ceramics: where are we now? Dent Mater 27:71–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Takeuchi K, Fujishima A, Manabe A et al (2010) Combination treatment of tribochemical treatment and phosphoric acid ester monomer of zirconia ceramics enhances the bonding durability of resin-based luting cements. Dent Mater J 29:316–323.  https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2009-099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang B, Barloi A, Kern M (2010) Influence of air-abrasion on zirconia ceramic bonding using an adhesive composite resin. Dent Mater 26:44–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.08.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Siqueira F, Cardenas AM, Gutierrez MF et al (2016) Laboratory performance of universal adhesive systems for luting CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Adhes Dent 18:331–340.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a36519 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nagaoka N, Yoshihara K, Feitosa VP, Tamada Y, Irie M, Yoshida Y, van Meerbeek B, Hayakawa S (2017) Chemical interaction mechanism of 10-MDP with zirconia. Sci Rep 7:45563.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep45563 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen Y, Tay FR, Lu Z, Chen C, Qian M, Zhang H, Tian F, Xie H (2016) Dipentaerythritol penta-acrylate phosphate—an alternative phosphate ester monomer for bonding of methacrylates to zirconia. Sci Rep 6:39542.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep39542 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chen Y, Lu Z, Qian M, Zhang H, Xie H, Chen C (2017) Effect of 10-methacryloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate concentration on chemical coupling of methacrylate resin to Yttria-stabilized zirconia. J Adhes Dent 19:349–355.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a38893 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Papia E, Larsson C, Du Toit M et al (2014) Bonding between oxide ceramics and adhesive cement systems: a systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 102:395–413.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.33013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Blatz MB, Alvarez M, Sawyer K et al (2016) How to bond zirconia: the APC concept. Compend Contin Educ Dent 37:611–617Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kern M, Barloi A, Yang B (2009) Surface conditioning influences zirconia ceramic bonding. J Dent Res 88:817–822.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034509340881 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kosmac T, Oblak C, Jevnikar P et al (1999) The effect of surface grinding and sandblasting on flexural strength and reliability of Y-TZP zirconia ceramic. Dent Mater 15:426–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sato H, Yamada K, Pezzotti G et al (2008) Mechanical properties of dental zirconia ceramics changed with sandblasting and heat treatment. Dent Mater J 27:408–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Aurélio IL, Marchionatti AME, Montagner AF, May LG, Soares FZM (2016) Does air particle abrasion affect the flexural strength and phase transformation of Y-TZP? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Mater 32:827–845.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zeighami S, Gheidari A, Mahgoli H, Rohanian A, Ghodsi S (2017) Effect of sandblasting angle and distance on biaxial flexural strength of zirconia-based ceramics. J Contemp Dent Pract 18:443–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nishigawa G, Maruo Y, Irie M, Maeda N, Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N, Matsumoto T, Minagi S (2016) Various effects of sandblasting of dental restorative materials. PLoS One 11:e0147077.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hallmann L, Ulmer P, Lehmann F et al (2016) Effect of surface modifications on the bond strength of zirconia ceramic with resin cement resin. Dent Mater 32:631–639.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hallmann L, Ulmer P, Wille S, Polonskyi O, Köbel S, Trottenberg T, Bornholdt S, Haase F, Kersten H, Kern M (2016) Effect of surface treatments on the properties and morphological change of dental zirconia. J Prosthet Dent 115:341–349.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Özcan M, Volpato CAM (2015) Adhesion to zirconium dioxide used for dental reconstructions: surface conditioning concepts, challenges, and future prospects. Curr Oral Health Rep 2:190–194.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40496-015-0071-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Khan AA, Al Kheraif AAA, Jamaluddin S et al (2017) Recent trends in surface treatment methods for bonding composite cement to zirconia: a reveiw. J Adhes Dent 19:7–19.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a37720 Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Salem R, Naggar GE, Aboushelib M, Selim D (2016) Microtensile bond strength of resin-bonded high translucency zirconia using different surface treatments. J Adhes Dent 18:191–196.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a36034 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mattiello RDL, Coelho TMK, Insaurralde E, Coelho AAK, Terra GP, Kasuya AVB, Favarão IN, Gonçalves LS, Fonseca RB (2013) A review of surface treatment methods to improve the adhesive cementation of zirconia-based ceramics. ISRN Biomaterials 2013:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/185376 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vechiato-Filho AJ, Matos AO, Landers R, Goiato MC, Rangel EC, de Souza GM, Barão VAR, dos Santos DM (2017) Surface analysis and shear bond strength of zirconia on resin cements after non-thermal plasma treatment and/or primer application for metallic alloys. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 72:284–292.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.11.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Han G-J, Kim J-H, Cho B-H, Oh KH, Jeong JJ (2017) Promotion of resin bonding to dental zirconia ceramic using plasma deposition of tetramethylsilane and benzene. Eur J Oral Sci 125:81–87.  https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vilas Boas Fernandes Júnior V, Barbosa Dantas DC, Bresciani E et al (2018) Evaluation of the bond strength and characteristics of zirconia after different surface treatments. J Prosthet Dent [Article in press].  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.029
  41. 41.
    Pott PC, Syväri TS, Stiesch M, Eisenburger M (2018) Influence of nonthermal argon plasma on the shear bond strength between zirconia and different adhesives and luting composites. J Adhes Prosthodont 10:308–314.  https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tabari K, Hosseinpour S, Mohammad-Rahimi H (2017) The impact of plasma treatment of Cercon zirconia ceramics on adhesion to resin composite cements and surface properties. J Lasers Med Sci 8:S56–S61.  https://doi.org/10.15171/jlms.2017.s11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kaimal A, Ramdev P, Shruthi CS (2017) Evaluation of effect of zirconia surface treatment, using plasma of argon and silane, on the shear bond strength of two composite resin cements. J Clin Diagn Res 11:ZC39–ZC43.  https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/27426.10372 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Valverde GB, Coelho PG, Janal MN et al (2013) Surface characterisation and bonding of Y-TZP following non-thermal plasma treatment. J Dent 41:51–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Piest C, Wille S, Strunskus T, Polonskyi O, Kern M (2018) Efficacy of plasma treatment for decontaminating zirconia. J Adhes Dent 20:289–297.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a40986 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Associate of Dental Material Unit, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University HospitalLudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  2. 2.Dental Technician of Dental Material Unit, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University HospitalLudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  3. 3.Scientific Head of Dental Material Unit, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University HospitalLudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  4. 4.Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University HospitalLudwig-Maximilians-University MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations