Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia‑reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments
on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to zirconia‑reinforced lithium silicate
ceramic and to compare it with lithium disilicate ceramic.
Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 80 specimens containing two glass ceramics of IPS
e.max press and VITA SUPRINITY were prepared and categorized into four groups according to
the surface treatments (n = 10) as Group 1 (C): no treatment (control); Group 2 (HF): etching
with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s followed by silane application; Group 3 (SPH): sandblasting
with Al2O3 particles (50 μm), etching with 35% phosphoric acid for 40 s followed by application
of silane and adhesive (Clearfil liner bond F); and Group 4 (SB): sandblasting with Al2O3 followed
by silanization. Then, a resin cement (Panavia F2) was applied to the prepared ceramic surfaces.
All samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles, 5–55). The μSBS test was evaluated and
failure modes were recorded. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk, two‑way analysis of
variance and Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference post hoc tests (P < 0.05).
Results: IPS e.max press samples revealed significantly higher μSBS values compared to VITA
SUPRINITY (P < 0.001), in whole surface treatments. The HF group showed the highest μSBS
value, followed by the SPH and SB groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Adhesive failure was recorded
as a predominant failure mode.
Conclusion: The adhesion performance of IPS e.max press was significantly higher than VITA
SUPRINITY. The common surface treatment protocol including HF application followed by
silanization was the most effective surface treatment for both glass ceramics.
Key Words: Glass ceramics, hydrofluoric acid, lithia disilicate, resin cements