Volume 6, Issue 1, June 2020, Page: 7-12
A Comparative Assessment of Bond Strength of PEEK Crowns to Natural Teeth with Two Different Resin Cements
Nishath Ayesha, Department of Prosthodontics Including Crown and Bridge and Implantology, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Telangana, India
Sadiq Mohammed Sabir Ali, Sri Sai Dental College and Hospital, Hyderabad, India
Y. Mahadev Shastry, Sri Sai Dental College and Hospital, Hyderabad, India
K. Mahendernath Reddy, Sri Sai Dental College and Hospital, Hyderabad, India
Received: May 20, 2020;       Accepted: Jun. 20, 2020;       Published: Aug. 4, 2020
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20200601.12      View  206      Downloads  45
Abstract
Statement of problem: For a successful clinical outcome, luting agents should have a high bond strength. Bond failure is still one of the main reasons of restoration failures. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate tensile bond strength of PEEK with two different resin cements. Materials and methodology: Two self-adhesive cements (RelyX Unicem, G-CEM LinkAce), twenty permanent human premolars were used. In the present experimental study, teeth were prepared to receive copings with a chamfer bur at high speed cooled with an air/water spray. PEEK copings were fabricated and specimens were divided into two groups based on the type of cement used. The tensile load required to de-bond the crowns was measured using universal testing machine with a cross speed of 1mm/min. The data was analysed by paired t test. Results: The maximum and minimum amounts of bond strength were seen in RelyX Unicem and G-CEM LinkAce cements respectively. Despite this different bond values in cements, paired t test disclosed significant difference between groups in the mean amount of bond strength (p-value=0.05). Conclusion: Regarding the results of the study, it was concluded that G-CEM LinkAce presented higher bond strength.
Keywords
G-CEM LinkAce, PEEK, RelyX Unicem, Tensile Bond Strength
To cite this article
Nishath Ayesha, Sadiq Mohammed Sabir Ali, Y. Mahadev Shastry, K. Mahendernath Reddy, A Comparative Assessment of Bond Strength of PEEK Crowns to Natural Teeth with Two Different Resin Cements, International Journal of Dental Medicine. Vol. 6, No. 1, 2020, pp. 7-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20200601.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Sproesor O, Schmidlin P R, Uhrenbacher J, Roos M, Gernet W, Stawarczyk B. Effect of sulfuric acid etching of polyether ether ketone on shear bond strength to resin cements. J Adhes Dent 2014; 16: 465-72.
[2]
Kitakayam S, Toru N, Rena M, Lei Z Masaomi I, Akihiko W, Richard M. Effect of an internal coating technique on tensile bond strength of resin cements to Zirconia ceramics. Dent Materials J. 2009; 28 (4): 446-453.
[3]
Kurtz S M, Devine J N, PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic and spinal implants, Biomaterials 2007: 28; 4845-4869.
[4]
Burgess JO, Ghuman G. A practical guide to the use of luting cements; a prereviewed publication. Originally published as an insert to Dental Economics, 2008.
[5]
Tamrakar AK, Manu R, Rizwana M. CAD-CAM in prosthodontics-A futuristic overview Annals of Dental Speciality Vol. 2; 1: 2014.
[6]
Ourahmoune R, Salvia M, Mathia TG, Berthel B, Fouvry S, Mesrati N. Effect of sandblasting substrate treatment on single lap shear strength of adhesively bonded PEEK and its composites. In18th international conference on composite materials 2011 (pp. 2-7).
[7]
Zhou L, Qian Y, Zhu Y, Liu H, Gan K, Guo J. The effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of PEEK composite materials. Dent Mater. 2014; 30 (8): e209-15.
[8]
M. Kern, A. Barloi, and B. Yang. Surface Conditioning Influences Zirconia Ceramic Bonding JDent Res 2009, 88 (9): 817-822.
[9]
Tetelman E D, Babbush C A. A new transitional abudments for immediate aesthetics and function. Implant Dent 2008: 17: 51-58.
[10]
Hallmann L, Mehl A, Sereno N, Hämmerle CHF. The improvement of adhesive properties of PEEK through different pretreatments. Appl Surf Sci 2012; 258: 7213-8.
[11]
Stawarczyk B, Bähr N, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Eichberger M, Gernet W, Jahn D, Schmidlin PR. Influence of plasma pretreatment on shear bond strength of self adhesive resin cements to polyether ether ketone. Clin oral invest. 2014; 18 (1): 163-70.
[12]
Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC, Sorensen JA. In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 265-273.
[13]
Bishara SE, Oonsombat C, Soliman M M, Warren JJ, Laffoon J Ajlouni R. Comparision of bonding time and shear bond strength between a conventional and a new integrated bonding system. Angle Orthod 2005, 75 (2): 237-42.
[14]
De Munck. J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt. K, Hikitha. K. 2004. Bonding of an auto adhesive luyting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 20, 963-971.
[15]
Saskalauskaite E, Tam L E, Mc Comb D. Flexural strength, elastic modulus, and Ph profile of self-etch resin luting cements. J Prosthodont 2008; 17: 262-268.
[16]
Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, ZUCHNER H, Schafer E. Chemical analysis and bonding reaction of Rely X Unicem and Bifix composites-A comparative study. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 934-731.
[17]
Caughman WF, Daniel ME, Chan CN, et al. Curing potential of dual –polymerizable resin cements in simulated clinical situations. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 479-484.
[18]
Susan Hattar, Muhanad M, Hatamleh, Bond strength of self-adhesive resin Cements to tooth structure. The Saudi Dental Journey 2015.
Browse journals by subject