Comparison of two bond strength testing methodologies for bilayered all-ceramics

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorDundar, Mine
dc.contributor.authorOzcan, Mutlu
dc.contributor.authorGokce, Bulent
dc.contributor.authorComlekoglu, Erhan
dc.contributor.authorLeite, Fabiola
dc.contributor.authorValandro, Luiz Felipe
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-27T19:34:48Z
dc.date.available2019-10-27T19:34:48Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.departmentEge Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives. This study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) and microtensile (MTBS) testing methodologies for core and veneering ceramics in four types of all-ceramic systems. Methods. Four different ceramic veneer/core combinations, three of which were feldspathic and the other a fluor-apatite to their respectively corresponding cores, namely leucitereinforced ceramic ((IPS)Empress, Ivoclar), low leucite-reinforced ceramic (Finesse, Ceramco), glass-infiltrated alumina (In-Ceram Alumina, Vita) and lithium disilicate ((IPS)Empress 2, Ivoclar) were used for SBS and MTBS tests. Ceramic cores (N = 40, n = 10/group for SBS test method, N=5blocks/group for MTBS test method) were fabricated according to the manufacturers' instructions (for SBS: thickness, 3 mm; diameter, 5 mm and for MTBS: 10 mm x 10 mm x 2 mm) and ultrasonically cleaned. The veneering ceramics (thickness: 2 mm) were vibrated and condensed in stainless steel moulds and fired onto the core ceramic materials. After trying the specimens in the mould for minor adjustments, they were again ultrasonically cleaned and embedded in PMMA. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 1 week and bond strength tests were performed in universal testing machines (cross-head speed: 1mm/min). The bond strengths (MPa +/- S.D.) and modes of failures were recorded. Results. Significant difference between the two test methods and all-ceramic types were observed (P < 0.05) (2-way ANOVA, Tukey's test and Bonferroni). The mean SBS values for veneering ceramic to lithium disilicate was significantly higher (41 +/- 8 MPa) than those to low leucite (28 +/- 4 MPa), glass-infiltrated (26 +/- 4 MPa) and leucite-reinforced (23 +/- 3 MPa) ceramics, while the mean MTBS for low leucite ceramic was significantly higher (15 +/- 2 MPa) than those of leucite (12 +/- 2 MPa), glass-infiltrated (9 +/- 1 MPa) and lithium disilicate ceramic (9 +/- 1 MPa) (ANOVA, P < 0.05). Significance. Both the testing methodology and the differences in chemical compositions of the core and veneering ceramics influenced the bond strength between the core and veneering ceramic in bilayered all-ceramic systems. (c) 2006 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.dental.2006.05.004en_US
dc.identifier.endpage636en_US
dc.identifier.issn0109-5641
dc.identifier.issn1879-0097
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.pmid16844212en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage630en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.05.004
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11454/39651
dc.identifier.volume23en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000245820700015en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Sci Ltden_US
dc.relation.ispartofDental Materialsen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectall-ceramicsen_US
dc.subjectbond strengthen_US
dc.subjectcore-veneer ceramicen_US
dc.subjectmicrotensile testen_US
dc.subjectshear testen_US
dc.titleComparison of two bond strength testing methodologies for bilayered all-ceramicsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu