TY - JOUR
T1 - Effect of MDP-containing Silane and Adhesive Used Alone or in Combination on the Long-term Bond Strength and Chemical Interaction with Lithium Disilicate Ceramics
AU - Cardenas, Andres Millan
AU - Siqueira, Fabiana
AU - Hass, Viviane
AU - Malaquias, Pâmela
AU - Gutierrez, Mario Felipe
AU - Reis, Alessandra
AU - Perdigão, Jorge
AU - Loguercio, Alessandro D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Quintessenz.
PY - 2017/7/3
Y1 - 2017/7/3
N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the effect of a silane and an adhesive containing MDP, used alone or combined in the same solution, on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) to lithium disilicate ceramics immediately and after 1-year water storage, and compare the bond strength results with the Raman spectra of the treated lithium disilicate surfaces. Materials and Methods: A total of 30 CAD/CAM blocks of lithium disilicate (LD; IPS e.max CAD) were cut into four square sections (6 x 6 x 6 mm; n = 60 per group) and processed as recommended by the manufacturer. The LD specimens were divided into 12 groups according to the following independent variables: silane coupling agent (no silane; silane without 10-MDP [MBS, Monobond S]; silane with 10-MDP [MB+, Monobond Plus]) and adhesive + luting composite (no adhesive + Enforce; no adhesive + RelyX Ultimate; Prime & Bond Elect [PBE], a silane- and MDPfree universal adhesive + Enforce; Scotchbond Universal Adhesive [SBU], a silane- and MDP-containing universal adhesive + RelyX Ultimate). After each treatment, cylindrical, transparent matrices were filled with a luting composite and light cured. Specimens were stored in water (37°C for 24 h or 1 year) and submitted to the microshear bond strength (μSBS) test. The failure pattern and μSBS were statistically evaluated (α = 0.05). In addition, specimens were examined for chemical interaction using Raman spectroscopy. Results: The use of the adhesive PBE alone showed higher mean μSBS compared with both groups with silane (MSB or MB+) without PBE (p < 0.001) at 24 h. The use of the SBU adhesive or MBS silane alone, as well as MB+ associated with SBU, showed higher mean μSBS (p < 0.001) at 24 h. After 1-year water storage, all groups showed a significant decrease in mean μSBS. However, the application of PBE or SBU associated with MB+ silane showed higher 1-year mean μSBS (p < 0.001). In terms of chemical interaction, when silane (MSB or MB+) was applied, only a slight decrease of Si-O peaks occurred. Otherwise, when PBE or SBU adhesives were applied, methacrylate peaks were only observed in the SBU groups. Conclusion: The best results in terms of bond strength after water storage were obtained when an MDP-containing silane was associated with a universal adhesive. The use of a simplified bonding protocol that includes either a silane or a universal adhesive is not recommended.
AB - Purpose: To evaluate the effect of a silane and an adhesive containing MDP, used alone or combined in the same solution, on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) to lithium disilicate ceramics immediately and after 1-year water storage, and compare the bond strength results with the Raman spectra of the treated lithium disilicate surfaces. Materials and Methods: A total of 30 CAD/CAM blocks of lithium disilicate (LD; IPS e.max CAD) were cut into four square sections (6 x 6 x 6 mm; n = 60 per group) and processed as recommended by the manufacturer. The LD specimens were divided into 12 groups according to the following independent variables: silane coupling agent (no silane; silane without 10-MDP [MBS, Monobond S]; silane with 10-MDP [MB+, Monobond Plus]) and adhesive + luting composite (no adhesive + Enforce; no adhesive + RelyX Ultimate; Prime & Bond Elect [PBE], a silane- and MDPfree universal adhesive + Enforce; Scotchbond Universal Adhesive [SBU], a silane- and MDP-containing universal adhesive + RelyX Ultimate). After each treatment, cylindrical, transparent matrices were filled with a luting composite and light cured. Specimens were stored in water (37°C for 24 h or 1 year) and submitted to the microshear bond strength (μSBS) test. The failure pattern and μSBS were statistically evaluated (α = 0.05). In addition, specimens were examined for chemical interaction using Raman spectroscopy. Results: The use of the adhesive PBE alone showed higher mean μSBS compared with both groups with silane (MSB or MB+) without PBE (p < 0.001) at 24 h. The use of the SBU adhesive or MBS silane alone, as well as MB+ associated with SBU, showed higher mean μSBS (p < 0.001) at 24 h. After 1-year water storage, all groups showed a significant decrease in mean μSBS. However, the application of PBE or SBU associated with MB+ silane showed higher 1-year mean μSBS (p < 0.001). In terms of chemical interaction, when silane (MSB or MB+) was applied, only a slight decrease of Si-O peaks occurred. Otherwise, when PBE or SBU adhesives were applied, methacrylate peaks were only observed in the SBU groups. Conclusion: The best results in terms of bond strength after water storage were obtained when an MDP-containing silane was associated with a universal adhesive. The use of a simplified bonding protocol that includes either a silane or a universal adhesive is not recommended.
KW - Bond strength
KW - CAD/CAM lithium disilicate
KW - Luting composite
KW - Resin cement
KW - Universal dentin adhesive
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021400988&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3290/j.jad.a38414
DO - 10.3290/j.jad.a38414
M3 - Article
C2 - 28580465
AN - SCOPUS:85021400988
SN - 1461-5185
VL - 19
SP - 203
EP - 212
JO - Journal of Adhesive Dentistry
JF - Journal of Adhesive Dentistry
IS - 3
ER -