Bonding state of metal-free CAD/CAM onlay restoration after cyclic loading with and without immediate dentin sealing
Source abstract
Abstract
To examine the bonding state of metal-free CAD/CAM onlay restorations made from two popular resin composite blocks and a typical glass-ceramic block after cyclic loading, with and without immediate dentin sealing (IDS). Standardized mesial-distal-occlusalbuccal (MODB) cavities in 24 extracted human molars were prepared. The intra-cavity dentin surfaces of half of the cavities were immediately sealed with all-in-one adhesive and flowable composite, while those of the other half were not. All cavities were scanned, from which CAD/CAM onlays were fabricated from three types of block and cemented with an adhesive resin cement system. The restored specimens were subjected to cyclic loading and the intra-cavity microtensile bond strength was measured. IDS improves not only the internal bond strength, but also the bond reliability of metal-free CAD/CAM onlay restorations. The resin composite block seems to be more effective than a typical glass-ceramic block for achieving both high bond strength and excellent bond reliability.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental Research and COVID-19
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Adhesive Dentistry, School of Life Dentistry at Tokyo, The Nippon Dental University
References (45)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Summit JB, Robbins JW, Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS, editors. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry. A contemporary Approach. 3th ed. Chicago: Quintessence Pub; 2006. p. 293-294.
2. 2) Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr, editors. Sturdevant’s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2006. p. 504-505.
3. 3) Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr, editors. Sturdevant’s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2006. p. 611-613.
4. 4) Banerjee A, Watson TF. Pickard’s Guide to Minimally Invasive Operative Dentistry. 10th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015. p. 105-107.10.1093/oso/9780198712091.003.0008 ↗
5. 5) Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Dentry IL, Thomas GW, Qian F. Internal fit of pressed and computer aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 113: 304-309.10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.015 ↗
6. 6) Fasbinder DJ. Chairside CAD/CAM: An overview of restorative. Comp Contin Educ Dent 2012; 33: 52-58.
7. 7) Ruse ND, Sadoun MJ. Resin-composite blocks for dental CAD/CAM applications. J Dent Res 2014; 93: 1232-1234.10.1177/0022034514553976 ↗
8. 8) Zhi L, Bortolotto T. Comparative in vitro wear resistance of CAD/CAM composite resin and ceramic materials. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 115: 199-202.10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.07.011 ↗
9. 9) Hopp CD, Land MF. Considerations for ceramic inlays in posterior teeth: a review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2013; 5: 21-32.10.2147/CCIDE.S42016 ↗
10. 10) Kamada K, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Effect of ceramic surface treatments on the bond of four resin luting agents to a ceramic material. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79: 508-513.10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70170-2 ↗
11. 11) Lührs AK, Pongprueksa P, De Munck J, Geurtsen W, Van Meerbeek B. Curing mode affects bond strength of adhesively luted composite CAD/CAM restorations to dentin. Dent Mater 2014; 30: 281-291.10.1016/j.dental.2013.11.016 ↗
12. 12) Roperto R, Akkus A, Akkus O, Lang L, Sousa-Neto MD, Teich S, Soares Porto T. Effect of difference adhesive strategies on microtensile bond strength of computer sided design/computer aided manufacturing blocks bonded to dentin. Dent Res J 2016; 13: 117-123.10.4103/1735-3327.178196 ↗
13. 13) Islam MR, Takada T, Weerasinghe DS, Uzzaman MA, Foxton RM, Nikaido T, Tagami J. Effect of resin coating on adhesion of composite crown restoration. Dent Mater J 2006; 25: 272-279.10.4012/dmj.25.272 ↗
14. 14) Feitosa VP, Medina ADC, Puppin-Rontani RM, Correr Sobrinho L, Sinhoreti MAC. Effect of resin coat technique on bond strength of indirect restorations after thermal and cyclic load. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 2010; 51: 111-118.10.2209/tdcpublication.51.111 ↗
15. 15) Jayasooriya PR, Pereira PNR, Nikaido T, Burrow MF, Tagami J. The effect of a ‘‘Resin Coating’’ on the interfacial adaptation of composite inlays. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 28-35.
16. 16) Qanungo A, Aras MA, Chitre V, Mysore A, Amin B, Daswani SR. Immediate dentin sealing for indirect bonded restorations. J Prosthodont Res 2016; 60: 240-249.10.1016/j.jpor.2016.04.001 ↗
17. 17) Attita A, Abdelaziz KM, Freitag S, Kern M. Fracture load of composite resin and feldspathic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95: 117-123.10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.11.014 ↗
18. 18) Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Clinical performance of CEREC ceramic inlays: a systematic review. Dent Mater 1999; 15: 54-61.10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00014-7 ↗
19. 19) Posselt A, Kerschbaum T. Longevity of 2328 chairside Cerec inlays and onlays. Int J Comput Dent 2003; 6: 231-248.
20. 20) Bindl A, Richter B, Mörmann WH. Survival of ceramic computer-aided design/manufacturing crowns bonded to preparations with reduced macroretention geometry. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 18: 219-224.
21. 21) 3M ESPE. LavaTM Ultimate CAD/CAM Restorative Technical Product Profile 2016.
22. 22) VITA. VITA ENAMIC Technical and scientific documentation 2016.
23. 23) VITA. VITABLOCS Working Instructions 2016.
24. 24) De Munck J, Luehrs AK, Poitevin A, Van Ende A, Van Meerbeek B. Fracture toughness versus micro-tensile bond strength testing of adhesive-dentin interfaces. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 635-644.10.1016/j.dental.2013.03.010 ↗
25. 25) Souza EM, De Munck J, Pongprueksa P, Van Ende A, Van Meerbeek B. Correlative analysis of cement-dentin interface using an interfacial fracture toughness and micro-tensile bond strength approach. Dent Mater 2016; 32: 1575-1585.10.1016/j.dental.2016.09.031 ↗
26. 26) Lavelle C, Relova-Quinteiro JL. Mastication: Scully C, editors. Oxford Handbook of Applied Dental Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press. Inc.; 2002. p. 149-156.
27. 27) Neill DJ. Studies of tooth contact in complete dentures. Br Dent J 1967; 123: 369-378.
28. 28) Shepherd RW. A further report on mandibular movement. Aust Dent J 1960; 5: 337-342.10.1111/j.1834-7819.1960.tb03173.x ↗
29. 29) DeLong R, Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Pintado MR. The wear of dental amalgam in an artificial mouth: a clinical correlation. Dent Mater 1985; 1: 238-242.10.1016/S0109-5641(85)80050-6 ↗
30. 30) Barkmeier WW, Latta MA, Erickson RL, Lambrechts P. Comparison of laboratory and clinical wear rates of resin composites. Quintessence Int 2004; 35: 269-274.
31. 31) Hernandez Al, Roongruangphol T, Katsube N, Seghi PR. Residual interface tensile strength of ceramic bonded to dentin after cyclic loading and aging. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 99: 209-217.10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60045-1 ↗
32. 32) Yamada T, Maseki T, Nara Y. Effect of dynamic load on adhesion of hybrid ceramic onlay restoration. Jpn J Conserv Dent 2011; 54: 347-360.
33. 33) Maeno M, Yamada T, Nara Y. Adhesion of CAD/CAM ceramic onlay restoration —Effect of immediate dentin sealing on intra-cavity bond strength. Jpn Adhes Dent 2014; 32: 77-87.
34. 34) Montagner AF, Opdam NJ, Ruben JL, Cenci MS, Huysmans MC. Bonding effectiveness of composite-dentin interface after mechanical loading with a new device (Rub&Roll). Dent Mater J 2016; 35: 855-861.10.4012/dmj.2015-395 ↗
35. 35) Hayashi K, Kawai T, Ogawa S, Maeno M, Maseki T, Dogon IL, Nara Y. Effect of optical scanner and immediate dentin sealing application on cavity adaptation of CAD/CAM restoration. J Dent Res 2016; 95(SI-A), https://aadr2016. zerista.com/poster/member/55806. (accessed 16.07.07).
36. 36) Weibull W. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability. J Appl Mech 1951; 18: 293-297.10.1115/1.4010337 ↗
37. 37) Robin C, Scherrer SS, Wiskott HWA, de Rijk WG, Belser UC. Weibull parameters of resin composite bond strength to porcelain and noble alloy using the Rocatec system. Dent Mater 2002; 18: 389-395.10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00062-8 ↗
38. 38) ISO/TS 11405: 2015. Dentistry —Testing of adhesion to tooth structure. 3rd ed, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2015.
39. 39) Tjandrawinata R, Irie M, Suzuki K. Twenty-four hour flexural and shear bond strength of flowable light-cured composites: A comparison analysis using Weibull statistics. Dent Mater J 2007; 26: 589-597.10.4012/dmj.26.589 ↗
40. 40) Foster JA, Berzins DW, Bradley TG. Bond strength of an amorphous calcium phosphate-containing Orthodontic adhesive. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 339-344.10.2319/020807-60 ↗
41. 41) 3M ESPE. FiltekTM Supreme Ultra Flowable Restorative technical product profile 2010.
42. 42) 3M ESPE. RelyXTM Ultimate Adhesive Resin Cement Technical Date Sheet 2012.
43. 43) Chun K, Choi H, Lee J. Comparison of mechanical property and role between enamel and dentin in the human teeth. J Dent Biomech 2014; 5: 1-7.10.1177/1758736014520809 ↗
44. 44) El Zohairy AA, De Gee AJ, Mohsen MM, Feilzer AJ. Microtensile bond strength testing of luting cements to prefabricated CAD/CAM ceramic and composite blocks. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 575-583.10.1016/S0109-5641(02)00107-0 ↗
45. 45) Ausiello P, Rengo S, Davidson CL, Watts DC. Stress distribution in adhesively cemented ceramic and resin-composite Class II inlay restorations: a FEA study. Dent Mater 2004; 20: 862-872.10.1016/j.dental.2004.05.001 ↗