FARKLI YÜZEY DEKONTAMİNASYON YÖNTEMLERİNİN CAD/CAM YÜZEYLERİN BAĞLANMA DAYANIM DEĞERLERİ ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1, 38 - 43, 15.02.2022

Elif İlgi Sancak Neslihan Tekçe

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.1009758

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, CAD/CAM yüzeylerinde gerçekleştirilen yapıştırma prosedürünün farklı aşamalarında gerçekleşen tükürük kontaminasyonun, su ya da etanol ile temizlenmesinin bağlanma dayanıma etkisini incelemektir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Cerasmart (GC) ve Shofu Block (Shofu) CAD/CAM materyallerden (772 mm) hazırlanan örnekler, otopolimerizan akrilik ile sabitlendi. Örneklerin yüzeyleri Al2O3 kum ile kumlandı, arkasından çalışma protokollerine göre şu şekilde gruplara ayrıldı: Grup-1(kontrol): Firma önerisi yapıştırma protokolü (Primer/Siman/Kompozit), Grup-2: Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / Su ile temizleme/Primer/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-3: Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / %70 etanol ile temizleme /Primer/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-4: Primer-uygulaması/ Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / Su ile temizleme / Tekrar primer-uygulaması/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-5: Primer-uygulaması / Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / %70 etanol ile temizleme / Tekrar-primer uygulaması /Siman/Kompozit. Her grup için CAD/CAM materyallere primer olarak Z-Prime Plus 10 sn uygulandı. Ardından hazırlanan kompozit rezinler (Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray), dual-cured rezin siman (Duo-Link Universal Light Curing Resin Cement, BİSCO) aracılığıyla yapıştırıldı. Örnekler 24 saat 37 oC suda bekletildi ve bağlanma dayanım testine tabi tutuldu. Veriler tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD testi kullanılarak analiz edildi (p<0.05).
Bulgular: En yüksek bağlanma dayanımı değeri Cerasmart Grup-1’de (19.865.27.), en düşük bağlanma dayanımı değeri Shofu Block HC Grup-5’te (13.024.83) bulundu (p=0.67). Tükürük kontaminasyonun primer uygulamasından önce veya sonra gerçekleşmesi bağlanma dayanım değerlerini etkilemedi. Her iki materyal içinde dekontaminasyon işleminin su ya da %70 etanol ile gerçekleştirilmesi arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık bulunmadı.
Sonuç: Kontaminasyonun primer uygulamasından önce veya sonra meydana gelmesinin bağlanma dayanımına etkisi bulunmamaktadır. Uygulanan her iki dekontaminasyon yöntemi de klinik olarak yeterli bağlanma dayanımı sağlamaktadır. Primer kullanımı, gelişmiş bağlanma dayanımı değerleri üzerinde etkilidir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: CAD/CAM, Rezin Seramik, Bağlanma Dayanımı, Kontaminasyon, Tükürük

The Effect of Different Surface Decontamination Procedures on the Bond Strength Values of CAD/CAM Restoratives
ABSTRACT
Aim: The aim of this study is to examine the effect of saliva contamination, which occurs at different stages of the bonding procedure on CAD/CAM surfaces, on the bond strength of decontamination with water or ethanol.
Materials and Methods: Samples prepared from GC Cerasmart and Shofu Block CAD/CAM materials (772 mm) were fixed with autopolymerizing acrylic. The surfaces of the samples were sandblasted with Al2O3, then were divided into groups according to study protocols.
Group-1 (control):Company recommendation bonding protocol (Primer/Cement/Composite), Group-2:Saliva-contamination/Cleaning with water/primer/cement/composite, Group-3:Saliva-contamination/Cleaning with 70% ethanol/primer/cement/composite Group-4:Primer-application/Saliva-contamination/Cleaning with water/Re-primer-application/cement/composite, Group-5:Primer-application/Saliva-contamination/Cleaning with 70% ethanol/Re-primer-application/cement/composite. For each groups, Z-Prime Plus was applied to the CAD/CAM for 10-seconds as a primer. After, the composite resins (Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray) were bonded via dual-cured resin cement (Duo-Link resin cement, Bisco). The samples were kept in 37 oC water for 24 hours and subjected to the bond strength test. Data were analyzed with one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD tests (p0.05).
Results: The highest bond strength value was found in Cerasmart Group-1 (19.865.27.) and the lowest value was found in Shofu Block Group-5 (13.024.83)(p=0.67). The occurrence of saliva contamination before or after primer didn’t affect the bond strength values. There was no statistically significant difference between decontamination with water or 70% ethanol for both materials.
Conclusions: Contamination occurred before or after the primer has no effect on bond strength. Both decontamination methods provide clinically sufficient bond strength. The use of primer is effective on improved bond strength values.
Keywords: CAD/CAM, Resin Ceramic, Bond Strength, Contamination, Saliva

Anahtar Kelimeler

CAD/CAM, Rezin Seramik, Bağlanma Dayanımı, Kontaminasyon, Tükürük

Kaynakça

• 1. Cantürk K , Karalar B , Sağsöz Ö , Seven N , Polat Sağsöz N ZBY. Farklı üniversal bağlayıcı ajanların CAD/CAM seramiklerin kompozit rezin ile tamiri sonrası bağlanma kuvvetine etkisi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekim Fakültesi Derg 2019;29:381-386.
• 2. Kawaguchi A, Matsumoto M, Higashi M, Miura J, Minamino T, Kabetani T, Takeshige F, Mine A YH. Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive and conventional-type adhesive resin cements to CAD/CAM resin blocks. Part 2: Effect of ultrasonic and acid cleaning. Dent Mater J 2016;35:29-36.
• 3. Coldea A, Swain MV TN. Mechanical properties of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network materials. Dent Mater 2013;29:419-426.
• 4. Conrad HJ, Seong WJ PI. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98:389-404.
• 5. Ruse ND SM. Resin-composite blocks for dental CAD/CAM applications. J Dent Res 2014;93:1232-1234.
• 6. Vichi A, Carrabba M, Paravina R FM. Translucency of ceramic materials for CEREC CAD/CAM system. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014;26:224-231.
• 7. Della Bona A, Nogueira AD PO. Optical properties of CAD-CAM ceramic systems. J Dent 2014;42:1202-1209.
• 8. Coldea A, Swain MV TN. In-vitro strength degradation of dental ceramics and novel PICN material by sharp indentation. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2013;26:34-42.
• 9. Della Bona A, Corazza PH ZY. Characterization of a polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network material. Dent Mater 2014;30:564-569.
• 10. Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Vermeulen KM, Raghoebar GM CM. Clinical Bonding of Resin Nano Ceramic Restorations to Zirconia Abutments: A Case Series within a Randomized Clinical Trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016;18:984-992.
• 11. Bonfante EA, Suzuki M, Lorenzoni FC et al. Probability of survival of implant-supported metal ceramic and CAD/CAM resin nanoceramic crowns. Dent Mater 2015;31:e168-e177.
• 12. Higashi M, Matsumoto M, Kawaguchi A et al. Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive and conventional-type adhesive resin cements to CAD/CAM resin blocks. Part 1: Effects of sandblasting and silanization. Dent Mater J 2016;35:21-28.
• 13. Zhang S, Kocjan A, Lehmann F, Kosmac T KM. Influence of contamination on resin bond strength to nano-structured alumina-coated zirconia ceramic. Eur J Oral Sci 2010;118:396-403.
• 14. Ishii R, Tsujimoto A, Takamizawa T et al. Influence of surface treatment of contaminated zirconia on surface free energy and resin cement bonding. Dent Mater J 2015;34:91-97.
• 15. Yang B, Scharnberg M, Wolfart S et al. Influence of contamination on bonding to zirconia ceramic. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2007;81:283-290.
• 16. Samran A, Al-Ammari A, El Bahra S, Halboub E, Wille S KM. Bond strength durability of self-adhesive resin cements to zirconia ceramic: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:477-484.
• 17. Angkasith P, Burgess JO, Bottino MC LN. Cleaning Methods for Zirconia Following Salivary Contamination. J Prosthodont 2016;25:375-379.
• 18. Eiriksson SO, Pereira PN, Swift EJ Jr, Heymann HO SA. Effects of saliva contamination on resin-resin bond strength. Dent Mater 2004;20:37-44.
• 19. Chung CW, Yiu CK, King NM, Hiraishi N TF. Effect of saliva contamination on bond strength of resin luting cements to dentin. J Dent 2009;37:923-931.
• 20. Papia E, Larsson C, du Toit M V von SP. Bonding between oxide ceramics and adhesive cement systems: a systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2014;102:395-413.
• 21. Yang B, Lange-Jansen HC, Scharnberg M et al. Influence of saliva contamination on zirconia ceramic bonding. Dent Mater 2008;24:508-513.
• 22. Takahashi A, Takagaki T, Wada T, Uo M, Nikaido T TJ. The effect of different cleaning agents on saliva contamination for bonding performance of zirconia ceramics. Dent Mater J 2018;37:734-739.
• 23. Güers P, Wille S, Strunskus T, Polonskyi O KM. Durability of resin bonding to zirconia ceramic after contamination and the use of various cleaning methods. Dent Mater 2019;35:1388-1396.
• 24. Irmak Ö, Yaman BC, Orhan EO, Kılıçarslan MA, Mante FK OF. Influence of cleaning methods on bond strength to saliva contaminated zirconia. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30:551-556.
• 25. Piest C, Wille S, Strunskus T, Polonskyi O KM. Efficacy of Plasma Treatment for Decontaminating Zirconia. J Adhes Dent 2018;20:289-297.
• 26. Quaas AC, Yang B KM. Panavia F 2.0 bonding to contaminated zirconia ceramic after different cleaning procedures. Dent Mater 2007;23:506-512.
• 27. Yoshida K. Influence of cleaning methods on resin bonding to saliva-contaminated zirconia. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30:259-264.
• 28. McDonnell G RA. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999;12:147-179.
• 29. Aboush Y. Removing saliva contamination from porcelain veneers before bonding. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:649-653.
• 30. Kawaguchi-Uemura A, Mine A, Matsumoto M et al. Adhesion procedure for CAD/CAM resin crown bonding: Reduction of bond strengths due to artificial saliva contamination. J Prosthodont Res 2018;62:177-183.
• 31. Romero MJ, Nakashima S, Nikaido T, Ichinose S, Sadr A TJ. Inhibition of hydroxyapatite growth by casein, a potential salivary phosphoprotein homologue. Eur J Oral Sci 2015;123:288-296.
• 32. Noronha MDS, Fronza BM, André CB et al. Effect of zirconia decontamination protocols on bond strength and surface wettability. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020;32:521-529.
• 33. Hatırlı, H., Karaarslan, E.Ş., Tekiroğlu Yelken, Z., Tonga, G., Demir O. Hibrid Seramik ve Kompozit Rezin Bağlanma Dayanımında, Farklı Yüzey Hazırlıkları ve Üniversal Adeziv Uygulamalarının Etkisi. Turkiye Klin J Dent Sci 2020;26:443-449.
• 34. Spitznagel FA, Horvath SD, Guess PC BM. Resin bond to indirect composite and new ceramic/polymer materials: a review of the literature. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014;26:382-393.
• 35. Ellakwa AE, Shortall AC, Burke FJ MP. Effects of grit blasting and silanization on bond strengths of a resin luting cement to Belleglass HP indirect composite. Am J Dent 2003;16:53-57.
• 36. Oyagüe RC, Monticelli F, Toledano M, Osorio E, Ferrari M OR. Effect of water aging on microtensile bond strength of dual-cured resin cements to pre-treated sintered zirconium-oxide ceramics. Dent Mater 2009;25:392-399.
• 37. Hitmi L, Attal JP DM. Influence of the time-point of salivary contamination on dentin shear bond strength of 3 dentin adhesive systems. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:219-232.
• 38. Cobanoglu N, Unlu N, Ozer FF BM. Bond strength of self-etch adhesives after saliva contamination at different application steps. Oper Dent 2013;38:505-511.
• 39. Nair P, Hickel R IN. Adverse effects of salivary contamination for adhesives in restorative dentistry. A literature review. Am J Dent 2017;30:156-164.
• 40. Neelagiri K, Kundabala M, Shashi RA, Thomas MS PA. Effects of saliva contamination and decontamination procedures on shear bond strength of self-etch dentine bonding systems: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:71-75.
• 41. Santschi K, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A FS. ffect of salivary contamination and decontamination on bond strength of two one-step self-etching adhesives to dentin of primary and permanent teeth. J Adhes Dent 2015;17:51-57.
• 42. Elkassas D AA. Assessment of post-contamination treatments affecting different bonding stages to dentin. Eur J Dent 2016;10:327-332.
• 43. Nair P IN. he long-term consequence of salivary contamination at various stages of adhesive application and clinically feasible remedies to decontaminate. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24:4413-4426.
• 44. Türkmen C, Durkan M, Cimilli H ÖM. Tensile bond strength of indirect composites luted with three new self-adhesive resin cements to dentin. J Appl Oral Sci 2011;19:363-369.
• 45. Afrasiabi A, Mostajir E GN. The effect of Z-primer on the shear bond strength of zirconia ceramic to dentin: in vitro. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e661-e664.
• 46. Tanaka R, Fujishima A, Shibata Y, Manabe A MT. Cooperation of phosphate monomer and silica modification on zirconia. J Dent Res 2008;87:666-670.
• 47. Inokoshi M, De Munck J, Minakuchi S VMB. Meta-analysis of bonding effectiveness to zirconia ceramics. J Dent Res 2014;93:329-334.
• 48. Magne P, Paranhos MP BLJ. New zirconia primer improves bond strength of resin-based cements. Dent Mater 2010;26:345-352.
• 49. Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N, Maruo Y, Nishigawa G, Irie M, Yoshida Y VMB. Sandblasting may damage the surface of composite CAD-CAM blocks. Dent Mater 2017;33:e124-e135.