Effect of Surface Treatment of Two Ceramic Materials by Er,Cr:YSGG Laser Irradiation on The Shear Bond Strength to Resin Cement “A Comparative in-Vitro Study”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2020.v23i3.1950Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser on the shear bond strength (SBS) and surface topography of two CAD/CAM ceramic materials bonded with self-adhesive resin cement. Material and methods: sixty ceramic CAD/CAM discs were obtained, 30 lithium disilicate (IPS Emax) and 30 hybrid resin ceramic (Vita Enamic). The Slices were allocated into six groups (n=10) according to ceramic material and surface treatment; Group (LD-C): IPS Emax treated with 9% hydrofluoric acid(HF), Groups (LD-P1) and (LD-P2): IPS Emax treated with Er,Cr:YSGG laser with parameters 1.5 W and 2.5 W, respectively. Group (RC-C): Vita Enamic treated with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF), Groups (RC-P1) and (RC-P2): Vita Enamic treated with Er,Cr:YSGG laser with parameters 1.5 W and 2.5 W, respectively. All samples were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement and thermocycled for 5000 cycles. The SBS was measured using a universal testing machine and the mean values (MPa) were analyzed using Two-way (ANOVA) (P ? 0.05) and Bonferroni’s post-hoc test. Results: RC-C (16.55) showed highest SBS followed by LD-C (13.79), which revealed no statistically significant difference with RC-P1 (12.33) and RC-P2 (11.2). The lowest SBS values were found with LD-P1 (2.7) and LD-P2 (2.1). SEM analysis revealed Vita Enamic to have the highest surface roughness. Fracture pattern analysis showed adhesive failure with IPS Emax groups and mixed failure with Vita Enamic groups. Conclusion: Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation with the parameters used did not increase SBS of IPS Emax and Vita Enamic with composite resin compared to HF acid etching.
Keywords
Er,Cr:YSGG laser; Shear bond strength; Surface treatment; Ceramic materials.
References
Kelly JR ZY. Dental Ceramics for Restoration and Metal Veneering. DentClin North Am 2018;61:797–819. doi:10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.005.
Daou EE. Esthetic Prosthetic Restorations : Reliability and Effects onAntagonist Dentition 2015:473–81.
SILVA LH da, LIMA E de, MIRANDA RB de P, FAVERO SS, LOHBAUERU, CESAR PF. Dental ceramics: a review of new materials andprocessing methods . Brazilian Oral Res 2017;31.
Thompson, V P.Rekow ED, Silva NR, Coelho PG, Zhang Y GP.Performance of Dental Ceramics : Challenges for Improvements2011:937–52. doi:10.1177/0022034510391795.
Lima E De, Barbosa J, Meira C, Özcan M, Cesar PF, Cesar PF. Chippingof Veneering Ceramics in Zirconium Dioxide Fixed Dental Prosthesis2015:169–73. doi:10.1007/s40496-015-0066-7.
Elsaka SE. Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD /CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems 2015;34:161–7.doi:10.4012/dmj.2014-159.
Neis CA, Luísa N, Albuquerque G, Souza I De. Surface Treatments forRepair of Feldspathic , Leucite- and Lithium Disilicate-Reinforced Glass2015;26:152–5.
Loomans B, Ozcan M. Intraoral Repair of Direct and Indirect Restorations:Procedures and Guidelines. Oper Dent 2016;41:S68–78. doi:10.2341/15-269-LIT.
Kimmich M, Stappert C. Intraoral treatment of veneering porcelainchipping of fixed dental restorations: A review and clinical application. JAm Dent Assoc 2013;144:31–44. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0011.
Akyil MS, Yilmaz A, Karaalioglu OF, Duymus ZY. Shear bond strength ofrepair composite resin to an acid-etched and a laser-irradiated feldspathicceramic surface. Photomed Laser Surg 2010;28:539–45.doi:10.1089/pho.2009.2586.
Zogheib L, Bona A, Kimpara E, McCabe J. Effect of hydrofluoric acidetching duration on the roughness and flexural strength of a lithiumdisilicate-based glass ceramic. Braz Dent J 2011;22:45–50.doi:10.1590/S0103-64402011000100008.
Grewal GK, Torrealba Y, Lagrave MO. Orthodontic bonding to porcelain Asystematic review 2014;84. doi:10.2319/083013-636.1.
Bertolini JC. Hydrofluoric acid: a review of toxicity. J Emerg Med1992;10:163–8. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(92)90211-b.
Litovitz TL, Klein-Schwartz W, Dyer KS, Shannon M, Lee S, Powers M.1997 annual report of the American Association of Poison ControlCenters Toxic Exposure Surveillance System. Am J Emerg Med1998;16:443–97. doi:10.1016/s0735-6757(98)90000-6.
Gallerani M, Bettoli V, Peron L, Manfredini R. Systemic and topical effectsof intradermal hydrofluoric acid. Am J Emerg Med 1998;16:521–2.doi:10.1016/s0735-6757(98)90008-0.
Özcan M, Allahbeickaraghi A, Dündar M. Possible hazardous effects ofhydrofluoric acid and recommendations for Possible hazardous effects ofhydrofluoric acid and recommendations for treatment approach : a review2011. doi:10.1007/s00784-011-0636-6.
Mirhashemi A, Sharifi N, Moharrami M, Chiniforush N. Evaluation ofDifferent Types of Lasers in Surface Conditioning of Porcelains: A ReviewArticle. J Lasers Med Sci 2017;8:101–11. doi:10.15171/jlms.2017.19.
Sari T, Tuncel I, Usumez A, Gutknecht N. Transmission of Er:YAG laserthrough different dental ceramics. Photomed Laser Surg 2014;32:37–41.doi:10.1089/pho.2013.3611.
Gökçe B, Özpinar B, Dündar M, Çömlekoglu E, Sen BH, Güngör MA.Bond Strengths of All-Ceramics: Acid vs Laser Etching. Oper Dent2007;32:173–8. doi:10.2341/06-52.
Dilber E, Yavuz T, Kara HB, Ozturk AN. Comparison of the Effects ofSurface Treatments on Roughness of Two Ceramic Systems. PhotomedLaser Surg 2012;30:308–14. doi:10.1089/pho.2011.3153.
Kara HB, Dilber E, Koc O, Ozturk AN, Bulbul M. Effect of different surfacetreatments on roughness of IPS Empress 2 ceramic. Lasers Med Sci2012;27:267–72. doi:10.1007/s10103-010-0860-3.
Alakus Sabuncuoglu F, Erturk E. Shear bond strength of brackets bondedto porcelain surface: in vitro study. J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent2016;50:9–18. doi:10.17096/jiufd.95403.
Yavuz T, Dilber E, Kara H, Tuncdemir A, Ozturk A. Effects of differentsurface treatments on shear bond strength in two different ceramicsystems. vol. 28. 2012. doi:10.1007/s10103-012-1201-5.
Yassaei S, Moradi F, Aghili H, Kamran MHL. Shear bond strength oforthodontic brackets bonded to porcelain following etching with Er:YAGlaser versus hydrofluoric acid. Orthodontics (Chic) 2013;14:e82-7.doi:10.11607/ortho.856.
Özdemir H, Aladağ Lİ. Effect of different surface treatments on bondstrength of different resin cements to lithium disilicate glass ceramic : anin vitro study 2017;2818. doi:10.1080/13102818.2017.1334589.
Kursoglu P, Motro PFK, Yurdaguven H. Shear bond strength of resincement to an acid etched and a laser irradiated ceramic surface. J AdvProsthodont 2013;5:98–103. doi:10.4047/jap.2013.5.2.98.
Esmaeel M, Chaharom E, Azar FP, Mohammadi N, Nasiri R. Effect ofSurface Preparation with Nd:YAG and Er,Cr:YSGG Lasers on the RepairBond Strength of Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramic to a Silorane-basedComposite Resin. Tabriz Univ Med Sci 2018;12:12–7.doi:10.15171/joddd.2018.003.
Rossato DM, Bandeca MC, Saade EG, Lizarelli RFZ, Bagnato VS, SaadJRC. Influence of Er:YAG laser on surface treatment of aged compositeresin to repair restoration. Laser Phys 2009;19:2144–9. doi:Doi10.1134/S1054660x09210105.
Mirzaie M, Garshasbzadeh NZ, Yassini E, Shahabi S, Chiniforush N.Effect of Laser Treatment on Surface Morphology of Indirect CompositeResin: Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) Evaluation. J Lasers MedSci 2013;4:92–5.
Ahmadizenouz G, Esmaeili B, Taghvaei A, Jamali Z, Jafari T, AmiriDaneshvar F, et al. Effect of different surface treatments on the shearbond strength of nanofilled composite repairs. J Dent Res Dent Clin DentProspects 2016;10:9–16. doi:10.15171/joddd.2016.002.
Alizadeh Oskoee P, Mohammadi N, Ebrahimi Chaharom ME, Kimyai S,Pournaghi Azar F, Rikhtegaran S, et al. Effect of Surface Treatment withEr;Cr:YSSG, Nd:YAG, and CO2 Lasers on Repair Shear Bond Strengthof a Silorane-based Composite Resin. J Dent Res Dent Clin DentProspects 2013;7:61–6. doi:10.5681/joddd.2013.011.
Mirzaei M, Yasini E, Tavakoli A, Chiniforush N. Effect of Different Powersof Er,Cr:YSGG Laser Treatment on Surface Morphology of MicrohybrideComposite Resin: Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) Evaluation. JLasers Med Sci 2015;6:62–6.
Mirzaie M, Yassini E, Etemadi A, Tavakoli A, Chiniforush N. Surfacetreatment comparison by application of diamond bur and Er,Cr:YSGG atdifferent powers: morphological and mechanical evaluation. Laser Ther2016;25:215–20. doi:10.5978/islsm.16-OR-18.
Oskoee PA, Oskoee SS, Rikhtegaran S, Pournaghi-Azar F, GholizadehS, Aleyasin Y, et al. Effect of various laser surface treatments on repairshear bond strength of aged silorane-based composite. J Lasers Med Sci2017;8:186–90. doi:10.15171/jlms.2017.34.
Barutcigil K, Kul E, Ozarslan MM, Buyukkaplan US. Effect of DifferentSurface Treatments on Bond Strength of Resin Cement to a CAD / CAMRestorative Material 2016:1–8. doi:10.1111/jopr.12574.
Diaci J, Gaspirc B. Comparison of Er:YAG and Er, Cr:YSGG lasers usedin dentistry. J Laser Heal Accademy 2012;2012:1–13.
Nagai T, Kawamoto Y, Kakehashi Y, Matsumura H. Adhesive bonding ofa lithium disilicate ceramic material with resin-based luting agents. J OralRehabil 2005;32:598–605. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01464.x.
Turkmen C, Durkan M, Cimilli H, Oksuz M. Tensile bond strength ofindirect composites luted with three new self-adhesive resin cements todentin. J Appl Oral Sci 2011;19:363–9. doi:10.1590/s1678-77572011005000011.
Vaz RR, Hipolito V Di, D’Alpino PHP, Goes MF de. Bond strength andinterfacial micromorphology of etch-and-rinse and self-adhesive resincements to dentin. J Prosthodont 2012;21:101–11. doi:10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00794.x.
Viotti RG, Kasaz A, Pena CE, Alexandre RS, Arrais CA, Reis AF.Microtensile bond strength of new self-adhesive luting agents andconventional multistep systems. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:306–12.doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60180-3.
Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testingof dental restorations. J Dent 1999;27:89–99.
Heintze SD. Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between laboratorytests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation betweenmarginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent 2007;9 Suppl1:77–106.
Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Mine A, Van Ende A, Neves A,et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes.Dent Mater 2010;26:e100-21. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.148.
Can-Karabulut DC, Oz FT, Karabulut B, Batmaz I, Ilk O. Adhesion toprimary and permanent dentin and a simple model approach. Eur J Dent2009;3:32–41.
Casagrande L, Goes MF De, Garcia-godoy F. Bond strength and failurepatterns of adhesive restorations in primary teeth aged in the oralenvironment 2006.
Morresi AL, D’Amario M, Capogreco M, Gatto R, Marzo G, D’ArcangeloC, et al. Thermal cycling for restorative materials: does a standardizedprotocol exist in laboratory testing? A literature review. J Mech BehavBiomed Mater 2014;29:295–308. doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.09.013.
Go A, Saygin ZE, Ozdemir AK, Orler OG. Influence of Various LaserSurface Modifications on SBS of Titanium and Zirconium OxideSubstructures Zirkonyum Oksit ve Titanyum Metal Alt Yapıların SBSÜzerine Farklı Lazer Yüzey Uygulamalarının Etkisi Influence of VariousLaser Surface Modifications 2017;38.
Oz FD, Canatan S, Bolay S. Effects of surface treatments on the bondstrength of composite resin to hybrid computer-assisteddesign/manufacturing blocks. J Adhes Sci Technol 2019;33:986–1000.doi:10.1080/01694243.2019.1575566.
Spitznagel FA, Horvath SD, Guess PC, Blatz MB. Resin bond to indirectcomposite and new ceramic/polymer materials: a review of the literature.J Esthet Restor Dent 2014;26:382–93. doi:10.1111/jerd.12100.
Fonseca RG, Haneda IG, Almeida-Junior AA, de Oliveira Abi-Rached F,Adabo GL. Efficacy of air-abrasion technique and additional surfacetreatment at titanium/resin cement interface. J Adhes Dent2012;14:453–9. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a23444.
Elsaka SE. Bond strength of novel CAD/CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments. J Adhes Dent2014;16:531–40. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a33198.
Fuentes MV, Ceballos L, Gonzalez-Lopez S. Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to different treated indirect composites. Clin OralInvestig 2013;17:717–24. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0752-y.
Braga RR, Meira JBC, Boaro LCC, Xavier TA. Adhesion to toothstructure: a critical review of “macro” test methods. Dent Mater2010;26:e38-49. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.150.
