Evaluation of shear bond strengths of various resin cements with different surface treatments to 3D printed materials
Embargo Date
2027-07-02
OA Version
Citation
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This in vitro study aims to compare and evaluate the shear bond strength of various resin cements with different 3D printed resin materials. It also seeks to determine the effects of various surface treatments on shear bond strength. Finally, the study investigates the impact of thermocycling on shear bond strength values.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study utilized two resin materials (n=360): Rodin Envision (Env)(n=180) and Varseosmile TriniQ (VST) (n=180). Vitablocs Mark II (MKII) (n=27) was used as a reference standard. The Asiga Max printer was used to print all specimens. The dimensions of the printed specimens were 15 x 15 x 2 mm, while the MKII specimens measured 12 x 14 x 3 mm. The MKII specimens were organized into groups of three, and the 3D printed resin specimens were organized into groups of 20. Groups were divided into three different surface treatments per cement. The surface treatments included in this experiment were sandblast treatment with 50 μm aluminum oxide particles, etching with 9.6% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 30 seconds, and a combination treatment involving sandblast treatment followed by application of 9.6% HF etch. Three resin cements, along with their respective bonding/silane agents, were employed in this experiment: Ivoclar Esthetic DC (IDC) with Adhese Universal Bonding Agent (AB), Rodin Luting Cement (RLC) with Rodin Bond (RB), and Panavia V5 (PV5) with Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus (CP). For the 3D printed resin specimens, half of the total number (n=180) underwent thermal aging with 5000 cycles prior to all specimens undergoing shear bond testing. The shear bond strength, measured in megapascals (MPa), was calculated, and the mode of failure was determined by examining the specimens under a digital 3D optical microscope. Results were analyzed using ANOVA, regression of least square means, Tukey HSD test, and Student’s t-test with a significant level of α = 0.05.
RESULTS: The PV5 cement groups were excluded from statistical analysis due to ongoing premature failures and their inability to bond effectively. For both 3D-printed resin materials, IDC cement demonstrated significantly higher SBS values than RLC. In both the control and thermocycled groups, the mean SBS for Env (29.33 MPa and 26.56 MPa, respectively) is significantly higher than that for VST (22.32 MPa and 14.65 MPa, respectively), both having p-value <0.0001. For Env, both the sandblast (30.49 MPa) and combination (28.81 MPa) treatments yielded significantly higher SBS values than the etched groups (24.56 MPa) with a p-value of 0.0021. For VST, the sandblast treatment (23.10 MPa) resulted in significantly higher values than the combination (16.57 MPa) and etched groups (15.79 MPa) with a p-value <0.0001. For Env, there is no significant difference in SBS values between the control and thermocycled groups (p-value = 0.049). However, when examining the cement-thermocycle interaction, the RLC thermocycle shows significantly lower values than those of IDC, with a p-value of 0.0021. For VST, there was a significant decrease in the mean SBS values of both cements after thermocycling with a p-value <0.0001. A significant correlation exists between the mode of failure and the mean SBS values, revealing that both cohesive and mixed failures occur at significantly higher mean SBS values compared to adhesive failures.
CONCLUSION: Significant differences in SBS exist between the two 3D printed resin materials, with Env having higher shear bond strength values. A strong correlation is observed between the filler percentage of the 3D printed material and SBS values. Both resin cements yielded significantly higher SBS values for Env. In both resin cements, the sandblast groups produced the highest SBS values, followed by the combination groups and, finally, the etching groups. Thermocycling has shown significant effects on VST for both cements, while it also significantly impacted RLC for Env.
Description
2028