UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL PAULISTA

“JÚLIO DE MESQUITA FILHO”

Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia

Campus de São José dos Campos

LITERATURE REVIEW DOI: https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2025.e4817

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits

unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-

ceramic materials

Possibilidades de condicionamento e alterações superﬁciais: uma diretriz para materiais vitrocerâmicos

Catina PROCHNOW1 , Jatyr PISANI-PROENCA2 , Maria Carolina Guilherme ERHARDT3 , Gabriel Kalil Rocha PEREIRA1 ,

Luciano de Souza GONÇALVES3 

1 - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Faculdade de Odontologia, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Orais (Área de Prótese),

Santa Maria, RS, Brazil

2 - Faculdade Ingá, Rede Hodos de Ensino, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

3 - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de Odontologia Conservadora, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

How to cite: Prochnow C, Pisani-Proenca J, Erhardt MCG, Pereira GKR, Gonçalves LS. Etching conditions and surface changes: a

guideline for glass-ceramic materials. Braz Dent Sci. 2025;28(2):e4817. https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2025.e4817

ABSTRACT

Statement of Problem: In terms of ceramic restorations, the achievement of a reliable adhesion involves following

specic protocols according to the ceramic material’s microstructure. Purpose: The aim of this comprehensive

review is to enlighten concepts and characteristics regarding adhesion/luting procedures to glass-ceramic materials,

guiding dental clinicians to ensure a long-term success of their glass-ceramic restorations. Materials and Methods:

These protocols represent scientically based treatments applied to establish micromechanical retention and

chemical adhesion among the different interfaces involved in the adhesive procedure (which comprises ceramic

restoration, resin cement and tooth substrate). Results: Regarding glass-ceramic restorations, the protocols

carried out to produce topographical changes on the cementation surface normally improve bond ability, and

consequently, lead to an increased load-bearing capacity under fatigue of the restorations. Conclusions: It is

imperative to elucidate the concepts related to the distinct glass-ceramic materials available in the dental market

and clarify the specications for the correct surface treatment of each material, since each one presents different

microstructure due to their singular chemical composition and arrangement.

KEYWORDS

Acid etching, Adhesive cementation, Silanization, Surface treatment, Vitreous ceramics.

RESUMO

Declaração do Problema: Em termos de restaurações cerâmicas, a obtenção de uma adesão conável envolve seguir

protocolos especícos de acordo com a microestrutura do material cerâmico. Objetivo: O objetivo desta revisão

é esclarecer conceitos e características sobre procedimentos de adesão/cimentação para materiais vitrocerâmicos,

orientando os clínicos a garantir o sucesso a longo prazo de suas restaurações vitrocerâmicas. Materiais e Métodos:

Esses protocolos representam tratamentos com base cientíca aplicados para estabelecer retenção micromecânica

e adesão química entre as diferentes interfaces envolvidas no procedimento adesivo (que compreende restauração

cerâmica, cimento resinoso e substrato dentário). Resultados: Em relação às restaurações vitrocerâmicas, os protocolos

realizados para produzir mudanças topográcas na superfície de cimentação normalmente melhoram a capacidade de

adesão e, consequentemente, levam a um aumento da capacidade de suporte de carga sob fadiga das restaurações.

Conclusões: É imperativo elucidar os conceitos relacionados aos distintos materiais vitrocerâmicos disponíveis no

mercado odontológico e esclarecer as especicações para o tratamento de superfície correto de cada material, uma

vez que cada um apresenta microestrutura diferente devido à sua composição química e arranjo singulares.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE

Condicionamento ácido, Cimentação adesiva, Silanização, Tratamento de superfície, Cerâmica vítrea.

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

CRITICAL REVIEW

Dental clinicians often deal with complex

situations when replacing missing teeth or

failed restorations. To meet these challenges,

manufacturers have developed a wide variety of

ceramic materials, each one with distinct chemical

compositions and mechanical properties. These

materials are no longer limited to traditional

layering techniques; they now include heat-

pressing and computer-aided design/computer-

aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) methods [1].

Among the available materials for

indirect restorations, glass-ceramics (with its

modifications) are a particularly appealing

option due to their combination of aesthetic

properties and moderate strength, derived from

their vitreous phase reinforced by crystals [2]. For

glass-ceramic restorations to achieve sufcient

load-bearing capacity, adhesive cementation is

essential, as it allows better load distribution

throughout the restoration-cement-tooth

interface [3]. Prior to cementation, the internal

surface of the glass-ceramic restoration must

be treated to create surface porosities or

irregularities that facilitate the penetration

of resin cement, thereby improving bond

strength [1]. The surface characteristics rely

on the microstructure and composition of the

chosen ceramic [4].

Hydrouoric acid (HF) etching is a well-

established method for ensuring strong adhesion

to glass-ceramics [5-7]. This technique selectively

attacks the silica phase of the ceramic, creating

a topographic pattern that enhances bonding by

increasing surface roughness and free surface

energy [4]. Furthermore, HF etching is preferred

when compared to sandblasting, as it generates

greater bond strength and prevents the formation

of cracks on the ceramic surface, which can lead

to premature bond failures [4]. Despite its proven

effectiveness, HF is a hazardous substance that

can cause severe burns and tissue damage upon

contact [8], and for that, it is not recommended

for intraoral use [9].

While creating a microrough surface

is beneficial for bonding, overly aggressive

pretreatment can degrade the glass-

ceramic surface, potentially weakening the

restoration [10,11]. Thompson and Anusavice [12]

observed that glass-ceramic crown failures often

originated at the cementation surface, where

pretreatment procedures were applied, suggesting

that HF over-etching can be a signicant cause of

failure in these materials [11].

Several commercial alternatives to HF

etching have been introduced for glass-ceramics,

including alumina particle abrasion, laser

irradiation, nonthermal plasma treatment, silica

vapor phase deposition, selective infiltration

etching, ceramic primers, and combinations of

these techniques [5,13-22]. One such alternative

is a ceramic primer developed by Ivoclar Vivadent,

designed to simplify the process by combining

HF etching and silane application into a single

bottle, achieving comparable adhesion and

fatigue strength [21-23]. However, most of these

alternative methods either lack substantial evidence

in the literature or do not surpass the effectiveness

of HF etching followed by silane application,

highlighting the need for further research [20].

Given the complexity of the available

surface treatment options and its impact on

reliability/clinical longevity of glass-ceramic

restorations, it is essential to provide dental

clinicians with clear guidelines to assist in

selecting the most appropriate pretreatment for

each glass-ceramic material. Therefore, the aim

of this study is to offer a comprehensive overview

of the surface treatments for cementation of

glass-ceramic restorations.

METHODS

Scientic papers in English and no period

restriction, including systematic reviews, clinical

trials, and in vitro studies, were manually

selected from dental journals indexed in

PubMed (via MEDLINE) and Google Scholar,

without restrictions on publication date. The

selected papers were in English and focused

on glass-ceramic surface treatments and luting

procedures. The information was then organized

and presented in a simplied manner to ensure

clarity and accessibility for dental clinicians.

Glass-ceramic characterization

Feldspathic ceramic

Feldspathic ceramics present noteworthy

characteristics such as high aesthetics and

strong bonding to resin cements, despite

having a relatively low flexural strength of

approximately 150 MPa [24]. Belli et al. [25]

evaluated feldspathic ceramic microstructure and

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

identied the presence of two distinct phases: a

highly etchable glass phase and an acid-resistant

crystalline phase. Consequently, after hydrouoric

acid etching, the high-fusion glass particles are

dissolved meanwhile the low-fusion glassy

matrix undergoes a less selective dissolution

process [25]. This results in a highly porous

material, well-documented in the literature

as “honeycomb-like appearance” [26,27]. The

recommendation for etching feldspathic ceramic

restorations is described in Table I according to

commercial brand and manufacturer.

Table I - Surface treatments suggested by the manufacturers according to the glass-ceramic composition

Ceramic Surface treatment Commercial Name (Brand)

Feldspathic 5% HF* for 60 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane

Vitablocs Mark II (VITA)

Vita PM9 (VITA)

CEREC Blocs

GC initial LRF (GC)

G Ceram

IPS Classic (Ivoclar Vivadent)

Super Porcelain NX3 (Noritake)

Leucite-enhanced 5% HF* for 60 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane

IPS Empress Esthetic and IPS Empress CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent)

GC InitialTM LRF BLOCK (GC Corporation)

Optimum Pressable CeramicOPC® (Jeneric/Pentron)

Finesse® (Dentsply)

Lithium disilicate

5% HF* for 20 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane or ME&P** IPS e.max Press and IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent)

5% HF* for 20 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane

Rosetta SM (HAASBio)

n!ce (Straumann)

Vintage LD Press (Shofu)

Vita Ambria (VITA)

4% HF* for 30 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane Amber Mill/Press/Press Master (HASSBio)

5% HF* for 30 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane CEREC Tessera (Dentsply)

5-9% HF* for 20 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane

LiSi Press/Block (GC)

K2 LI (Yeti GmbH)

Rainbow LS (GENOSS)

Creation SL Press (Creation Willi Geller)

Livento Press (Cendres + Metaux)

Zirconia-reinforced

lithium silicate

5% HF* for 20 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane Vita Suprinity (VITA)

5% HF* for 30 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane

Celtra DUO (Dentsply)

Celtra Press (Dentsply)

PICN 5% HF* for 60 s + rinse with air/water spray

for 30 seconds + silane Vita Enamic (VITA)

*HF: hydroﬂuoric acid; **ME&P: Monobond Etch&Prime (see manufacturer recommendation for using).

Leucite-enhanced ceramic

Leucite-enhanced glass-ceramic exhibits

a flexural strength ranging from 120 to

180 MPa, due to its nely dispersed leucite crystal

reinforcement [28]. Leucite llers are uniformly

distributed throughout the glass, typically at

concentrations between 35 to 45% by volume [28].

Belli et al. [25] examined the shape and size of the

dissolved crystallites following etching, revealing

well-dispersed, round and slightly elongated

cavities ranging in size from 0.5 to 3µm.

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

According to Apel et al. [29] the crystalline

content in leucite-enhanced ceramics is not

very effective in promoting crack deflection

(toughening mechanism), commonly observed in

lithium disilicate glass-ceramics [30]. However,

the high glass phase content (approximately

60% by volume for Empress CAD) plays an

essential role in aesthetics and in hydrouoric

acid sensitivity, enhancing adhesion [31].

Usually, the manufacturers recommend a 5%

HF application for 1 minute to etch leucite-

enhanced ceramics (Table I).

Lithium disilicate-based ceramic

Lithia-based glass ceramics, particularly

lithium disilicate (LDS), have gained popularity

since their introduction in dentistry due to their

ability to chemically bond, reect light similarly

to natural enamel, demonstrate high long-term

survival rates, exhibit enhanced mechanical

properties, and provide precise tting accuracy

through the heat-press technique [32-34].

Consequently, lithium disilicate has proven to

be suitable for various clinical applications,

including inlays, onlays, veneers, crowns, three-

unit bridges up to the premolars, and implant

abutments and crowns [34].

These materials offer signicantly higher

exural strength compared to conventional glass

ceramics, with values ranging from 360 to 440 MPa,

while maintaining excellent translucency due to

a specialized ring process [24]. The mechanical

properties are enhanced by lithium disilicate

crystals (approximately 70% by volume), which

are needle-shaped and measure about 0.5 to 4 µm,

randomly embedded in the glassy matrix [35].

These randomly oriented crystals act as “crack

stoppers,” contributing to increased flexural

strength and improved fatigue resistance [36].

Lithium disilicate can be acid-etched and

silanized, facilitating a straightforward and

predictable adhesive cementation process

that has been shown to provide long-lasting

clinical results [34]. Various concentrations of

hydrouoric acid (HF) are available on the market,

capable of modifying the microstructure through

partial glass dissolution, exposing the crystalline

phase, increasing surface energy, and enabling

micromechanical interlocking with the resin

cement via microporosities created on the ceramic

surface [37,38]. Additionally, a chemical bond is

formed through the interaction of hydrouoric

acid with the ceramic surface, resulting in

hexafluorosilicate formation. However, it is

crucial to follow the appropriate protocol for each

material, as over-etching can weaken the ceramic

by causing substantial surface disruption and the

formation of flaws, thereby compromising its

mechanical performance [11]. The recommended

etching protocol for lithium disilicate ceramics

is controversial among the manufacturers and

recently includes the application of Monobond

Etch&Prime or the use of HF from 4 to 9.5%

for 20 up to 30 seconds, as outlined by the

manufacturer’s guidelines (Table I).

Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate

Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) has

been introduced to improve mechanical and aesthetic

properties of lithium disilicate [39], achieved

through the presence of metasilicate and zirconia

crystals into the glass matrix [40]. This material

consists of a glassy matrix composed of lithium

metasilicates and lithium orthophosphates [2],

that generate particles of lithium silicate after the

crystallization process. This combination creates a

material with a exural strength between 550 and

674 MPa [41,42]. The reinforcement of the glassy

phase makes the material useful for anterior and

posterior full crowns, partial occlusal coverages,

and veneer restorations [2].

When compared to a conventional lithium

disilicate ceramic, ZLS presents a lower percentage

of crystal phase content, ranging from 40 to 57% as

opposed to 70% [43]. However, ZLS incorporates

smaller crystals, and the glassy matrix is reinforced

by the highly dispersed zirconium dioxide

(approximately 10% by weight), which is assumed

to enhance the strength of the glassy phase [2,42].

Notably, despite the presence of zirconium dioxide

crystals, it is important to highlight that ZLS

can be etched with HF, a feature not observed

in conventional zirconia-based systems. The

manufacturer recommendation for etching ZLS is

displayed in Table I.

Polymer-inltrated-ceramic-network (PICN)

Polymer-inltrated ceramic network (PICN)

materials were developed to combine the best

features of all-ceramic materials with those of

dental composites. These materials integrate

the elastic modulus of polymers, which is more

compatible with dentin, with the aesthetic

qualities and chemical stability of ceramics [2].

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

PICNs consist of an inorganic component (a

porous ceramic, similar to feldspathic ceramics)

comprising approximately 86 wt%, and an organic

polymeric component making up around 14 wt%

(Vita Zahnfabrik). According to Coldea et al. [44],

this combination offers several advantages,

including reduced brittleness, improved fracture

toughness, and increased rigidity and hardness,

while enhancing flexibility and machinability

compared to conventional glass-ceramics.

PICNs also exhibit higher flexural and

fatigue strengths than feldspathic ceramics [25],

with an elastic modulus closely matching that of

natural tooth tissue [45]. However, they are more

prone to slow crack growth [35]. An analysis of

PICN microstructures by Belli et al. [25] revealed

a crystalline structure similar to feldspathic

ceramics, with a glassy phase predominantly

composed of pure glass.

Due to the ease with which the polymer

phase of PICNs can be repaired using composite

resins [46], these materials offer a compelling

combination of the properties of glass-ceramics

and composites. As such, they are indicated

for anterior and posterior crowns, partial

occlusal coverage, and veneer restorations,

and are commercially available in CAD/

CAM blocks [2]. Table I demonstrates the

manufacturer’s recommendations for etching

PICN materials.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ceramic etching and silane coupling agents

Bi-functional trialkoxy silanes contain two

distinct functional groups: an alkoxy group

and a carbon-carbon double bond (C=C). The

alkoxy group can bond with inorganic materials,

while the carbon-carbon double bond attaches

to organic materials. In adhesive cementation,

silane coupling agents are employed to

enhance bonding between the luting agent and

silica-based restorative materials [47]. This

effectiveness is due to chemical bonding and

improved surface wettability when a silane agent

is applied to ceramic surfaces. Silane agents

should be applied in thin lms. If the siloxane

lm is too thick, it may lead to cohesive failure; if

too thin, it may result in incomplete coverage of

the ceramic surface, causing inadequate contact

between the silanized substrate and the resin

cement [48].

The low viscosity of silane agents is essential

for proper wetting and close contact with the

ceramic substrate [48], especially after ceramic

etching. Thanks to its low viscosity, the silane

is able to penetrate the irregularities produced

by HF etching, promoting a large surface area

with effective chemical bonding between the

ceramic and the resin luting agent. During drying,

silane forms a thin, branched siloxane film of

approximately 20-100 nm thick on the etched

surface [48]. However, studies have indicated

that applying silane alone to ceramic surfaces does

not improve bond strength because of insufcient

mechanical retention [49-51]. So, the efcacy of

the silanization processes is strongly dependent

on a correct surface treatment of the ceramic. In

this sense, errors in the conditioning of ceramic

surfaces are very harmful. One of the errors that

can occur is the over-etching of the surfaces, which

generates deep defects that make it difcult for the

inltration of the luting agent. In these situations,

the application of the unlled resin, like the non-

solvated bond of the adhesive system over silane

can provide better inltration to the irregularities

created on etched surfaces, irrespective of the

etching time, as shown in a previous study [52].

The benets of using resin luting agents

Given the inherent brittleness and limited

flexural strength of glass-ceramics, adhesive

cementation with composite resin-based

materials is recommended to enhance the fracture

strength of the restoration [53-58]. Silica-based

glass ceramic restorations luted with resin

composites demonstrate superior clinical survival

rates compared to those cemented with glass

ionomer [59] or zinc phosphate cements [60].

An appropriate resin-bonding protocol can

signicantly increase the fracture strength of dental

ceramics, thereby optimizing the performance of

indirect esthetic restorations [61]. Resin cements

also play a vital role in blocking crack propagation

by lling and healing cracks and irregularities on

the intaglio surface of the restoration [37,53,62],

which improves the overall longevity of ceramic

restorations by optimizing load transmission

across the restoration assembly [63]. This behavior

includes the irregularities produced by an ordinary

HF etching. However, if the glass-ceramic is

overetched, the use of an unlled resin over silane

also provides better inltration to the irregularities

created on etched surfaces, irrespective of the

conditioning time, reinforcing the material [63].

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

Important aspects before cementing glass-

ceramic restorations

After performing HF etching on glass-

ceramic restorations (as outlined in Table I),

precipitates and salts often accumulate on

the surface due to the removal of the glassy

matrix [64]. To effectively remove these

residues from feldspathic ceramics, the most

effective method appears to be the use of an

ultrasonic bath with distilled water [64-66].

However, Belli et al. [67] demonstrated that

for leucite and lithium disilicate ceramics,

an ultrasonic bath is just as effective as air/

water spray in producing good bond strength

and removing the residue layer. Similarly,

Magalhães et al. [68] found that a simple

air/water spray for 30 seconds is sufficient

to remove precipitates from lithium disilicate

surfaces following 20 seconds of HF etching,

thus negating the need for an ultrasonic bath

and reducing chairside preparation time.

A universal cleaning paste (Ivoclean, Ivoclar

Vivadent) is available for cleansing etched or

contaminated surfaces, such as those exposed to

saliva or blood, prior to cementation. This sodium

hydroxide-based product effectively removes

various contaminants from ceramic surfaces,

ensuring a clean surface for resin bonding

when used before or after etching [69-71].

Another product, ZirClean (Bisco), is designed to

eliminate phosphate contamination on zirconia

and glass-ceramic surfaces after intraoral try-ins,

ensuring reliable cementation results.

CONCLUSION

The cementation of glass-ceramic

restorations requires meticulous selection

of materials and techniques. One of these

techniques is the etching of ceramic surfaces.

Therefore, the clinician must be aware of:

The glass-ceramics’ microstructure

inuences the etching time, and according to

the HF concentration, the etching time must be

adjusted based on the ceramic manufacturer’s

instruction.

HF is toxic even at low concentrations and

short exposure times. Therefore, HF must be

carefully handled with adequate protraction to

avoid severe tissue damage to the professional

staff and the patients.

In case of over-etching of the ceramic

surface, the use of an unlled resin (non-solvated

adhesive) may be necessary to correctly ll the

porosity produced by the HF.

The application of a silane coupling

agent is vital to maximize the glass-ceramic

bonding, However, solely HF etching or the

silanization is insufcient for ensuring robust

and durable adhesion. The combination of the

micromechanical and chemical bond is the key

to the durability of adhesive cementation.

Author’s Contributions

CP: Conceptualization, Writing – Review

& Editing. JPP: Conceptualization, Data

Curation, Formal Analysis, Supervision. MCGE:

Methodology, Validation, Formal Analysis,

Writing, Data Curation, Supervision. GKRP:

Formal Analysis, Writing, Data Curation. LSG:

Methodology, Validation, Formal Analysis,

Writing, Data Curation, Supervision.

Conict of Interest

The authors hereby declare that there are

no conicts of interest regarding the research,

authorship, or publication of this article. All

authors have approved the nal version of the

manuscript and agree with its submission.

Funding

No financial, personal, or professional

relationships exist that could be construed to have

inuenced the work reported in this manuscript.

Regulatory Statement

As this manuscript is a literature review, it

does not involve any original studies with human

participants or animals conducted by the authors,

and therefore did not require ethical approval.

REFERENCES

1. Porto TS, Medeiros da Silva IG, de Freitas Vallerini B, Fernando

de Goes M. Different surface treatment strategies on etchable

CAD-CAM materials: Part 1-Effect on the surface morphology.

J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(5):761-9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2021.10.020. PMid:35094771.

2. Bacchi A, Cesar PF. Advances in ceramics for dental

applications. Dent Clin North Am. 2022;66(4):591-602. http://

doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2022.05.007. PMid:36216448.

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

3. Gressler May L, Kelly JR, Bottino MA, Hill T. Influence of the

resin cement thickness on the fatigue failure loads of CAD/

CAM feldspathic crowns. Dent Mater. 2015;31(8):895-900.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.04.019. PMid:26003231.

4. Sağlam G, Cengiz S, Köroglu A, Sahin O, Velioglu N. Comparison

of the micro-shear bond strength of resin cements to CAD/

CAM glass ceramics with various surface treatments. Materials

(Basel). 2023;16(7):2635. http://doi.org/10.3390/ma16072635.

PMid:37048927.

5. Menees TS, Lawson NC, Beck PR, Burgess JO. Influence of

particle abrasion or hydrofluoric acid etching on lithium disilicate

flexural strength. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1164-70. http://

doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.021. PMid:24951390.

6. Silva DO, Sato TP, Silva MB, Souza LG, Uemura ES, Silva JM. Bond

strength between resin cement to high-translucency zirconia

following sandblasting and non-thermal plasma treatment. Braz

Dent Sci. 2021;24(1):1-8. http://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2021.

v24i1.2266.

7. Porto TS, Medeiros da Silva IG, de Freitas Vallerini B, Fernando

de Goes M. Different surface treatment strategies on etchable

CAD-CAM materials: part II-Effect on the bond strength. J

Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(5):770-9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2021.10.007. PMid:35101273.

8. Dennerlein K, Kiesewetter F, Kilo S, Jäger T, Göen T, Korinth

G,et al. Dermal absorption and skin damage following

hydrofluoric acid exposure in an ex vivo human skin model.

Toxicol Lett. 2016;248:25-33. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

toxlet.2016.02.015. PMid:26930472.

9. Carpena G, Ballarin A. Hydroﬂuoric acid – Simple things you may

do not know about something you are so habituated to use.

Odovtos – Int J Dental SC 2014;16:15-23.

10. Venturini AB, Prochnow C, May LG, Bottino MC, Felipe Valandro

L. Influence of hydrofluoric acid concentration on the flexural

strength of a feldspathic ceramic. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater.

2015;48:241-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.03.025.

PMid:25966909.

11. Addison O, Marquis PM, Fleming GJ. The impact of hydrofluoric

acid surface treatments on the performance of a porcelain

laminate restorative material. Dent Mater. 2007;23(4):461-8.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.03.002. PMid:16620948.

12. Thompson JY, Anusavice KJ. Effect of surface etching on the

flexure strength and fracture toughness of Dicor disks containing

controlled flaws. J Dent Res. 1994;73(2):505-10. Erratum in J

Dent Res 1994 Mar;73(3):710. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022034

5940730020401. PMid:8120213.

13. Lima LC, Miranda JS, Carvalho RL, Barcellos AS, Amaral M,

Kimpara ET. Influence of substrate, cement and aging on the

biaxial flexural strength of lithium disilicate. Braz Dent Sci.

2023;26(4):e3978. http://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2023.e3923.

14. Mattiello RDL, Coelho TMK, Insaurralde E, Coelho AAK, Terra GP,

Kasuya AVB,etal. A Review of Surface Treatment Methods to

Improve the Adhesive Cementation of Zirconia-Based Ceramics.

ISRN Biomaterials Volume 2013, 185376

15. Vechiato Filho AJ, dos Santos DM, Goiato MC, de Medeiros

RA, Moreno A, Bonatto LR, etal. Surface characterization of

lithium disilicate ceramic after nonthermal plasma treatment.

J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1156-63. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2014.02.021. PMid:24928773.

16. Kursoglu P, Motro PF, Yurdaguven H. Shear bond strength of resin

cement to an acid etched and a laser irradiated ceramic surface.

J Adv Prosthodont. 2013;5(2):98-103. http://doi.org/10.4047/

jap.2013.5.2.98. PMid:23755333.

17. Yavuz T, Dilber E, Kara HB, Tuncdemir AR, Ozturk AN. Effects

of different surface treatments on shear bond strength in two

different ceramic systems. Lasers Med Sci. 2013;28(5):1233-9.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-012-1201-5. PMid:22971913.

18. Dilber E, Yavuz T, Kara HB, Ozturk AN. Comparison of the

effects of surface treatments on roughness of two ceramic

systems. Photomed Laser Surg. 2012;30(6):308-14. http://doi.

org/10.1089/pho.2011.3153. PMid:22506513.

19. Porto TS, Porto BG, de Campos EA,etal. Nd:YAG laser to obtain

irregularities on the inner surface of porcelain. J Contemp

Dent Pract. 2015;16(6):451-7. http://doi.org/10.5005/

jp-journals-10024-1705.

20. Prado M, Prochnow C, Marchionatti AME, Baldissara P, Valandro

LF, Wandscher VF. Ceramic surface treatment with a single-

component primer: resin adhesion to glass ceramics. J Adhes

Dent. 2018;20(2):99-105. http://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a40303.

PMid:29675515.

21. Scherer MM, Prochnow C, Venturini AB, Pereira GKR, Burgo TAL,

Rippe MP,etal. Fatigue failure load of an adhesively-cemented

lithium disilicate glass-ceramic: conventional ceramic etching vs

etch & prime one-step primer. Dent Mater. 2018;34(8):1134-43.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.04.012. PMid:29789162.

22. Tribst JP, Diamantino PJ, de Freitas MR,etal. Eﬀect of active

application of self-etching ceramic primer on the long-term bond

strength of diﬀerent dental CAD/CAM materials. J Clin Exp

Dent. 2021;13(11):e1089-95. http://doi.org/10.4317/jced.58723.

23. Dapieve KS, Machry RV, Pilecco RO, Kleverlaan CJ, Rocha Pereira

GK, Venturini AB,etal. One-step ceramic primer as surface

conditioner: effect on the load-bearing capacity under fatigue of

bonded lithium disilicate ceramic simplified restorations. J Mech

Behav Biomed Mater. 2020;104:103686. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jmbbm.2020.103686. PMid:32174433.

24. Guess PC, Schultheis S, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Ferencz

JL, Silva NR. All-ceramic systems: laboratory and clinical

performance. Dent Clin North Am. 2011;55(2):333-52, ix. http://

doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2011.01.005. PMid:21473997.

25. Belli R, Wendler M, de Ligny D, Cicconi MR, Petschelt A, Peterlik

H,etal. Chairside CAD/CAM materials. Part 1: measurement

of elastic constants and microstructural characterization.

Dent Mater. 2017;33(1):84-98. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

dental.2016.10.009. PMid:27890354.

26. Venturini AB, Prochnow C, Rambo D, Gundel A, Valandro LF.

Effect of hydrofluoric acid concentration on resin adhesion to

a feldspathic ceramic. J Adhes Dent. 2015;17(4):313-20. http://

doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a34592. PMid:26295066.

27. Bajraktarova-Valjakova E, Grozdanov A, Guguvcevski L,

Korunoska-Stevkovska V, Kapusevska B, Gigovski N,etal. Acid

etching as surface treatment method for luting of glass-ceramic

restorations, Part 1: acids, application protocol and etching

effectiveness. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2018;6(3):568-73.

http://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.147. PMid:29610622.

28. Hooshmand T, Parvizi S, Keshvad A. Effect of surface acid

etching on the biaxial flexural strength of two hot-pressed

glass ceramics. J Prosthodont. 2008;17(5):415-9. http://doi.

org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00319.x. PMid:18482364.

29. Apel E, Deubener J, Bernard A, Höland M, Müller R, Kappert

H,etal. Phenomena and mechanisms of crack propagation in

glass-ceramics. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2008;1(4):313-25.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2007.11.005. PMid:19627796.

30. Belli R, Petschelt A, Hofner B, Hajtó J, Scherrer SS, Lohbauer

U. Fracture rates and lifetime estimations of CAD/CAM All-

ceramic restorations. J Dent Res. 2016;95(1):67-73. http://doi.

org/10.1177/0022034515608187. PMid:26428908.

31. Ritzberger C, Schweiger M, Höland W. Principles of crystal

phase formation in Ivoclar Vivadent glass-ceramics for dental

restorations. J Non-Cryst Solids. 2016;432:137-42. http://doi.

org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2015.04.034.

32. Höland W, Rheinberger V, Apel E, van ’t Hoen C, Höland M,

Dommann A,et al. Clinical applications of glass-ceramics in

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

dentistry. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2006;17(11):1037-42. http://

doi.org/10.1007/s10856-006-0441-y. PMid:17122916.

33. Huang BR, Wang XY, Gao XJ. Effects of different surface

treatments on ceramic repairs with composite. Chin J Dent Res.

2013;16(2):111-7. PMid:24436946.

34. Malament KA, Margvelashvili-Malament M, Natto ZS,

Thompson V, Rekow D, Att W. 10.9-year survival of pressed

acid etched monolithic e.max lithium disilicate glass-

ceramic partial coverage restorations: performance and

outcomes as a function of tooth position, age, sex, and

the type of partial coverage restoration (inlay or onlay). J

Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(4):523-32. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2020.07.015. PMid:33012530.

35. Ramos NC, Campos TM, Paz IS, Machado JP, Bottino MA, Cesar

PF,et al. Microstructure characterization and SCG of newly

engineered dental ceramics. Dent Mater. 2016;32(7):870-8.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.018. PMid:27094589.

36. Lohbauer U, Fabris DCN, Lubauer J, Abdelmaseh S, Cicconi

MR, Hurle K, et al. Glass science behind lithium silicate

glass-ceramics. Dent Mater. 2024;40(5):842-57. http://doi.

org/10.1016/j.dental.2024.03.006. PMid:38580561.

37. Prochnow C, Pereira GKR, Venturini AB, Scherer MM, Rippe MP,

Bottino MC,etal. How does hydrofluoric acid etching affect the

cyclic load-to-failure of lithium disilicate restorations? J Mech

Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;87:306-11. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jmbbm.2018.07.040. PMid:30103112.

38. Prochnow C, Venturini AB, Guilardi LF, Pereira GKR, Burgo TAL,

Bottino MC,etal. Hydrofluoric acid concentrations: effect on the

cyclic load-to-failure of machined lithium disilicate restorations.

Dent Mater. 2018;34(9):e255-63. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

dental.2018.06.028. PMid:30031547.

39. Paken G, Yıldırım B, Ünal M, Tekeli A, Kırarslan Ö. Colour

agreement between try-in paste and resin cement: effect

of background on zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate. Aust

Dent J. 2021;66(4):406-12. http://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12866.

PMid:34212396.

40. Awada A, Nathanson D. Mechanical properties of resin-ceramic

CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(4):587-

93. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.016. PMid:26141648.

41. Demirel M, Diken Türksayar AA, Donmez MB. Translucency,

color stability, and biaxial flexural strength of advanced lithium

disilicate ceramic after coffee thermocycling. J Esthet Restor

Dent. 2023;35(2):390-6. http://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12960.

PMid:36057856.

42. Elsaka SE, Elnaghy AM. Mechanical properties of zirconia

reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic. Dent Mater.

2016;32(7):908-14. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.013.

PMid:27087687.

43. Freitas JS, Souza LFB, Dellazzana FZ, Silva TMRD, Ribeiro L,

Pereira GKR,etal. Advanced lithium disilicate: a comparative

evaluation of translucency and fatigue failure load to

other ceramics for monolithic restorations. J Mech Behav

Biomed Mater. 2023;148:106192. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jmbbm.2023.106192. PMid:37865017.

44. Coldea A, Swain MV, Thiel N. Mechanical properties of

polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network materials. Dent Mater.

2013;29(4):419-26. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.01.002.

PMid:23410552.

45. Silva LHD, Lima E, Miranda RBP, Favero SS, Lohbauer U, Cesar

PF. Dental ceramics: a review of new materials and processing

methods. Braz Oral Res. 2017;31(suppl 1):e58. http://doi.

org/10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2017.vol31.0058.

46. Chirumamilla G, Goldstein CE, Lawson NC. A 2-year retrospective

clinical study of enamic crowns performed in a private practice

setting. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2016;28(4):231-7. http://doi.

org/10.1111/jerd.12206. PMid:27219683.

47. Matinlinna JP, Lung CYK, Tsoi JKH. Silane adhesion mechanism in

dental applications and surface treatments: a review. Dent Mater.

2018;34(1):13-28. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.09.002.

PMid:28969848.

48. Matinlinna JP, Vallittu PK. Bonding of resin composites to etchable

ceramic surfaces - an insight review of the chemical aspects on

surface conditioning. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(8):622-30. http://

doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01569.x. PMid:17650173.

49. Shimada Y, Yamaguchi S, Tagami J. Micro-shear bond

strength of dual-cured resin cement to glass ceramics. Dent

Mater. 2002;18(5):380-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-

5641(01)00054-9. PMid:12175577.

50. Matinlinna JP, Lassila LV, Ozcan M, Yli-Urpo A, Vallittu PK. An

introduction to silanes and their clinical applications in dentistry.

Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(2):155-64. PMid:15119865.

51. Brentel AS, Ozcan M, Valandro LF, Alarça LG, Amaral R, Bottino

MA. Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to feldpathic

ceramic after different etching and silanization regimens in dry

and aged conditions. Dent Mater. 2007;23(11):1323-31. http://

doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.011. PMid:17188745.

52. Naves LZ, Soares CJ, Moraes RR, Gonçalves LS, Sinhoreti MA,

Correr-Sobrinho L. Surface/interface morphology and bond

strength to glass ceramic etched for different periods. Oper

Dent. 2010;35(4):420-7. http://doi.org/10.2341/09-152-L.

PMid:20672726.

53. May LG, Kelly JR, Bottino MA, Hill T. Effects of cement thickness

and bonding on the failure loads of CAD/CAM ceramic

crowns: multi-physics FEA modeling and monotonic testing.

Dent Mater. 2012;28(8):e99-109. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

dental.2012.04.033. PMid:22595741.

54. Posritong S, Borges AL, Chu TM, Eckert GJ, Bottino MA,

Bottino MC. The impact of hydrofluoric acid etching followed

by unfilled resin on the biaxial strength of a glass-ceramic.

Dent Mater. 2013;29(11):e281-90. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

dental.2013.08.210. PMid:24090742.

55. Spazzin AO, Guarda GB, Oliveira-Ogliari A, Leal FB, Correr-

Sobrinho L, Moraes RR. Strengthening of porcelain provided

by resin cements and flowable composites. Oper Dent.

2016;41(2):179-88. http://doi.org/10.2341/15-025-L.

PMid:26266657.

56. Barbon FJ, Moraes RR, Boscato N, Alessandretti R, Spazzin AO.

Feldspar ceramic strength and the reinforcing effect by adhesive

cementation under accelerated aging. Braz Dent J. 2018;29(2):202-

7. http://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201801896. PMid:29898069.

57. Coelho NF, Barbon FJ, Machado RG, Boscato N, Moraes

RR. Response of composite resins to preheating and the

resulting strengthening of luted feldspar ceramic. Dent Mater.

2019;35(10):1430-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2019.07.021.

PMid:31387743.

58. Barchetta NF, Amaral M, Prochnow C, Rodrigues FP, Bottino

MA, Valandro LF,etal. Strength of a zirconia-reinforced lithium

silicate ceramic: acid-etching time and resin cement application

effects. Int J Periodont Restor Dent. 2019;39(3):431-7. http://

doi.org/10.11607/prd.4117. PMid:30986292.

59. van Dijken JW, Höglund-Aberg C, Olofsson AL. Fired ceramic

inlays: a 6-year follow up. J Dent. 1998;26(3):219-25. http://doi.

org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00005-5. PMid:9594473.

60. Malament KA, Socransky SS. Survival of Dicor glass-ceramic dental

restorations over 16 years. Part III: effect of luting agent and tooth or

tooth-substitute core structure. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86(5):511-9.

http://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.119415. PMid:11725279.

61. Moro AFV, Ramos AB, Rocha GM, Perez CDR. Effect of prior silane

application on the bond strength of a universal adhesive to a

Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4817

Prochnow C et al.

Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for glass-cer amic materials

Prochnow C et al. Etching conditions and surface changes: a guideline for

glass-ceramic materials

Date submitted: 2025 May 15

Accept submission: 2025 June 02

Maria Carolina Guilherme Erhardt

(Corresponding address)

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Faculdade de Odontologia,

Departamento de Odontologia Conservadora, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

Email: carolinabee@hotmail.com

lithium disilicate ceramic. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(5):666-71.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.12.021. PMid:28385437.

62. Venturini AB, Prochnow C, May LG, Kleverlaan CJ, Valandro

LF. Fatigue failure load of feldspathic ceramic crowns after

hydrofluoric acid etching at different concentrations. J

Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(2):278-85. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2017.03.021. PMid:28552291.

63. Monteiro JB, Oliani MG, Guilardi LF, Prochnow C, Rocha Pereira

GK, Bottino MA,etal. Fatigue failure load of zirconia-reinforced

lithium silicate glass ceramic cemented to a dentin analogue:

effect of etching time and hydrofluoric acid concentration.

J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;77:375-82. http://doi.

org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.09.028. PMid:28988143.

64. Canay S, Hersek N, Ertan A. Effect of different acid treatments

on a porcelain surface. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28(1):95-101. http://

doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00626.x. PMid:11298915.

65. Hooshmand T, Daw R, van Noort R, Short RD. XPS analysis of the

surface of leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramics. Dent Mater.

2001;17(1):1-6. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00032-4.

PMid:11124407.

66. Leite FPP, Özcan M, Valandro LF, Moreira CHC, Bottino MA,

Kimpara ET. Effect of the etching duration and the ultrasonic

cleaning on microtensile bond strength between feldspathic

ceramic and resin cement. J Adhes. 2013;89(3):159-73. http://

doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2013.739024.

67. Belli R, Guimarães JC, Meyer A Fo, Vieira LC. Post-etching

cleaning and resin/ceramic bonding: microtensile bond strength

and EDX analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2010;12(4):295-303. http://doi.

org/10.3290/j.jad.a17709. PMid:20157658.

68. Magalhães APR, Decurcio RA, Ojeda GPD, Teixeira TR, Cardoso

PC. Does post-etching cleaning influence bond strength of

lithium disilicate laminate veneers? Compend Contin Educ Dent.

2017;38(5):e9-12. PMid:28459245.

69. Feitosa SA, Patel D, Borges AL, Alshehri EZ, Bottino MA, Özcan

M,etal. Effect of cleansing methods on saliva-contaminated zirconia-

-an evaluation of resin bond durability. Oper Dent. 2015;40(2):163-

71. http://doi.org/10.2341/13-323-L. PMid:25136900.

70. Angkasith P, Burgess JO, Bottino MC, Lawson NC. Cleaning

methods for zirconia following salivary contamination. J

Prosthodont. 2016;25(5):375-9. http://doi.org/10.1111/

jopr.12441. PMid:26833856.

71. Samran A, Al-Ammari A, El Bahra S, Halboub E, Wille

S, Kern M. Bond strength durability of self-adhesive

resin cements to zirconia ceramic: an in vitro study. J

Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(3):477-84. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.

prosdent.2018.03.026. PMid:30396707.