Current Oral Health Reports

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 234–243 | Cite as

Bonding of Dental Ceramics to Titanium: Processing and Conditioning Aspects

  • Maja Antanasova
  • Peter JevnikarEmail author
Dental Restorative Materials (M Özcan, section editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Dental Restorative Materials


Difficulties related to titanium processing (casting) and the problematic titanium-ceramic bond have been limiting the latter’s application in prosthetic dentistry for many years. Recent advances in subtractive and additive CAD/CAM technologies have provided alternative routes for titanium processing. The effect of a processing route on titanium surface characteristics and on the strength of its bond to porcelain need to be assessed, since most paths for enhancing porcelain bonding involve preparation of the titanium surface. Several approaches to bond enhancement have been proposed, some of which are widely accepted (abrasion by airborne-particle and application of a bonding agent), while others have not resulted in a clinical breakthrough. Despite efforts to improve titanium bonding to porcelain and to develop titanium compatible, low-fusing porcelains, many in vitro studies report bond strengths to titanium that are inferior to those for base metals and noble dental alloys. Only a few clinical studies have been reported, revealing that titanium-ceramic restorations are susceptible to mechanical complications (porcelain fractures in 33 % of cases). Current knowledge on titanium-ceramic bonding is here reviewed, focusing on the recent attempts to overcome the limitations of the system and on recent advances in titanium processing. Optimization of the currently available processing and surface conditioning methods seems to be necessary. Although most of the proposed surface preparation methods (surface coating and roughening) appear to show a certain degree of porcelain bond improvement, many of them require application of additional complex procedures. Simplification and improved efficiency therefore appear to be the essentials for implementation of these methods in clinical practice.


Titanium Bond strength Dental porcelain CAD/CAM Selective laser melting Surface conditioning 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Maja Antanasova and Peter Jevnikar declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• of major importance

  1. 1.
    Zarone F, Russo S, Sorrentino R. From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: clinical and experimental considerations. Dent Mater. 2001;27(1):83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pjetursson BE, Sailer I, Makarov NA, Zwahlen M, Thoma DS. All-ceramic or metal ceramic tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)? A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Part II: multiple-unit FDPs. Dent Mater. 2015;31(6):624–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Korkmaz T, Asar V. Comparative evaluation of bond strength of various metal-ceramic restorations. Mater Des. 2009;30(3):445–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grimaudo NJ. Biocompatibility of nickel and cobalt dental alloys. Gen Dent. 2001;49(5):498–503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hildebrand HF, Veron C, Martin P. Nickel, chromium, cobalt dental alloys and allergic reactions: an overview. Biomaterials. 1989;10(8):545–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elshahawy W, Watanabe I. Biocompatibility of dental alloys used in dental fixed prosthodontics. Tanta Dent J. 2014;11(2):150–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tvinnereim HV, Lundekvam BF, Morken T, Berge ME, Bjorkman L. Allergenic contact reactions to dental gold. Contact Dermatitis. 2003;48(5):288–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Möller H. Dental gold alloys and contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47(2):63–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jorge JR, Barao VA, Delben JA, Faverani LP, Queiroz TP, Assuncao WG. Titanium in dentistry: historical development, state of the art and future perspectives. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2013;13(2):71–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Özcan M, Hämmerle C. Titanium as a reconstruction and implant material in dentistry: advantages and pitfalls. Materials. 2012;5:1528–45. doi: 10.3390/ma5091528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oh KT, Kim KN. Electrochemical properties of suprastructures galvanically coupled to a titanium implant. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2004;70(2):318–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee JJ, Song KY, Ahn SG, Choi JY, Seo JM, Park JM. Evaluation of effect of galvanic corrosion between nickel-chromium metal and titanium on ion release and cell toxicity. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015;7(2):172–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haag P, Nilner K. Questions and answers on titanium-ceramic dental restorative systems: a literature study. Quintessence Int. 2007;38(1):e5–e13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haag P, Nilner K. Bonding between titanium and dental porcelain: a systematic review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2010;68(3):154–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lautenschlager EP, Monaghan P. Titanium and titanium alloys as dental materials. Int Dent J. 1993;43(3):245–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Troia Jr MG, Henriques GE, Nobilo MA, Mesquita MF. The effect of thermal cycling on the bond strength of low-fusing porcelain to commercially pure titanium and titanium-aluminium-vanadium alloy. Dent Mater. 2003;19(8):790–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.•
    Lee BA, Kim OS, Vang MS, Park YJ. Effect of surface treatment on bond strength of Ti-10Ta-10Nb to low-fusing porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):95–105. This in vitro study showed that the Ti-10Ta-10Nb alloy is a suitable alternative for fabrication of titanium FDP frameworks, providing somewhat improved porcelain bond strength compared to cpTi and Ti6Al4V.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.•
    Ho W-F, Wu S-C, Hsu S-K, Fang L-S, Hsu H-C. Bond strength of Ti-5Cr based alloys to dental porcelain with Mo addition. Mater Des. 2013;43:233–6. This in vitro study suggested that the addition of Mo to the composition of the Ti-5Cr alloys could lower the CTE mismatch between the metal framework and the low-fusing porcelain, leading to somewhat enhanced porcelain bonding, with the Ti-5Cr-9Mo alloy showing best results.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suansuwan N, Swain MV. Adhesion of porcelain to titanium and titanium alloy. J Dent. 2003;31(7):509–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bienias J, Surowska B, Stoch A, Matraszek H, Walczak M. The influence of SiO2 and SiO2-TiO2 intermediate coatings on bond strength of titanium and Ti6Al4V alloy to dental porcelain. Dent Mater. 2009;25(9):1128–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mohsen CA. Effects of surface roughness and thermal cycling on bond strength of C.P. titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy to ceramic. J Prosthodont Res. 2012;56(3):204–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yoda M, Konno T, Takada Y, Lijima K, Griggs J, Okuno O, et al. Bond strength of binary titanium alloys to porcelain. Biomaterials. 2001;22(12):1675–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wu SC, Ho WF, Lin CW, Kikuchi H, Lin FT, Hsu HC. Surface characterization and bond strengths between Ti-20Cr-1X alloys and low-fusing porcelain. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(3):368–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu L, Zhu H, Gai X, Wang Y. Evaluation of the mechanical properties and porcelain bond strength of cobalt-chromium dental alloy fabricated by selective laser melting. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111(1):51–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bae EJ, Kim JH, Kim WC, Kim HY. Bond and fracture strength of metal-ceramic restorations formed by selective laser sintering. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(4):266–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xiang N, Xin XZ, Chen J, Wei B. Metal-ceramic bond strength of Co-Cr alloy fabricated by selective laser melting. J Dent. 2012;40(6):453–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zinelis S, Tsetsekou A, Papadopoulos T. Thermal expansion and microstructural analysis of experimental metal-ceramic titanium alloys. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(4):332–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Inan O, Acar A, Halkaci S. Effects of sandblasting and electrical discharge machining on porcelain adherence to cast and machined commercially pure titanium. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2006;78(2):393–400.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adachi M, Mackert Jr JR, Parry EE, Fairhurst CW. Oxide adherence and porcelain bonding to titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy. J Dent Res. 1990;69(6):1230–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Iseri U, Özkurt Z, Kazazoglu E. Shear bond strengths of veneering porcelain to cast, machined and laser-sintered titanium. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(3):274–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Milleding P, Haag P, Neroth B, Renz I. Two years of clinical experience with Procera titanium crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11(3):224–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.••
    Hey J, Beuer F, Bensel T, Boeckler AF. Metal-ceramic-fixed dental prosthesis with CAD/CAM-fabricated substructures: 6-year clinical results. Clin Oral Invest. 2013;17(5):1447–51. This study evaluated the 6 year clinical behavior of CAD/CAM milled titanium-ceramic FDPs, showing poor clinical outcome for this system.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.••
    Hey J, Beuer F, Bensel T, Boeckler AF. Single crowns with CAD/CAM-fabricated copings from titanium: 6-year clinical results. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(2):150–4. This study evaluated the 6 year clinical behavior of CAD/CAM milled titanium-ceramic single crowns, showing poor clinical outcome. The authors concluded that CAD/CAM milled titanium-ceramic single crowns cannot be considered as an acceptable clinical treatment alternative to high gold alloy PFM crowns.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gilbert JL, Covey DA, Lautenschlager EP. Bond characteristics of porcelain fused to milled titanium. Dent Mater. 1994;10:134–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Boeckler AF, Lee H, Stadler A, Setz JM. Prospective observation of CAD/CAM titanium ceramic single crowns: a three-year follow up. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;102(5):290–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nilson H, Bergman B, Bessing C, Lundqvist P, Andersson M. Titanium copings veneered with Procera ceramics: a longitudinal clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 1994;7(2):115–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lövgren R, Andersson B, Carlsson GE, Odman P. Prospective clinical 5-year study of ceramic-veneered titanium restorations with the Procera system. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84(5):514–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Chai J, McGivney GP, Munoz CA, Rubenstein JE. A multicenter longitudinal clinical trial of a new system for restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77(1):1–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Walter M, Reppel PD, Boning K, Freesmeyer WB. Six-year follow-up of titanium and high-gold porcelain-fused-to-metal fixed partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil. 1999;26(2):91–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bergman B, Nilson H, Andersson M. A longitudinal clinical study of Procera ceramic-veneered titanium copings. Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(2):135–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bergman B, Marklund S, Nilson H, Hedlund SO. An intraindividual clinical comparison of 2 metal-ceramic systems. Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(5):444–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012;28(1):3–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Attar H, Calin M, Zhang LC, Scudino S, Eckert J. Manufacture by selective laser melting and mechanical behavior of commercially pure titanium. Mater Sci Eng A. 2014;593:170–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xu D, Xiang N, Wei B. The marginal fit of selective laser melting-fabricated metal crowns: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1437–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Huang Z, Zhang L, Zhu J, Zhang X. Clinical marginal and internal fit of metal ceramic crowns fabricated with a selective laser melting technology. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113(6):623–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Abou Tara M, Eschbach S, Bohlsen F, Kern M. Clinical outcome of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with laser-sintering technology. Int J Prosthodont. 2011;24(1):46–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Li BH, Ye JT, Liao JK, Zhuang PL, Zhang YP, Li JY. Effect of pretreatments on the metal-ceramic bonding strength of a Pd-Ag alloy. J Dent. 2014;42(3):319–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sipahi C, Özcan M. Interfacial shear bond strength between different base metal alloys and five low fusing feldspathic ceramic systems. Dent Mater J. 2012;31(3):333–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lopes SC, Pagnano VO, Rollo JM, Leal MB, Bezzon OL. Correlation between metal-ceramic bond strength and coefficient of linear thermal expansion difference. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(2):122–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Leal MB, Pagnano VO, Bezzon OL. Effect of investment type and mold temperature on casting accuracy and titanium-ceramic bond. Braz Dent J. 2013;24(1):40–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zinelis S, Barmpagadaki X, Vergos V, Chakmakchi M, Eliades G. Bond strength and interfacial characterization of eight low fusing porcelains to cp Ti. Dent Mater. 2010;26(3):264–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mabrurkar V, Habbu N, Hashmi SW, Musani S, Joshi N. In-vitro investigation to evaluate the flexural bond strengths of three commercially available ultra low fusing ceramic systems to Grade II titanium. J Int Oral Health. 2013;5(5):101–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zhang Z, Tan F, Ba Y, Zhang Y. Effects of different bond agents on commercially pure Ti-porcelain bond strength. Mater Lett. 2013;109:214–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    ISO 9693–1:2012 Dentistry-Compatibility testing-Part 1: Metal-ceramic systems. Geneva: International organization for standardization; 2012.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Oyafuso DK, Özcan M, Bottino MA, Itinoche MK. Influence of thermal and mechanical cycling on the flexural strength of ceramics with titanium or gold alloy frameworks. Dent Mater. 2008;24(3):351–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Atsü S, Berksun S. Bond strength of three porcelains to two forms of titanium using two firing atmospheres. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84(5):567–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Al Hussaini I, Al Wazzan KA. Effect of surface treatment on bond strength of low-fusing porcelain to commercially pure titanium. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(4):350–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yilmaz H, Dincer C. Comparison of the bond compatibility of titanium and an NiCr alloy to dental porcelain. J Dent. 1999;27(3):215–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Vasquez VZ, Özcan M, Kimpara ET. Evaluation of interface characterization and adhesion of glass ceramics to commercially pure titanium and gold alloy after thermal- and mechanical-loading. Dent Mater. 2009;25(2):221–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Guo L, Shi Y, Guo L, Zhang Q, Tian J, Zhu Y, et al. Preparation and characterization of a titanium bonding porcelain. Mater Sci Eng C. 2012;32(6):1531–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Özcan I, Uysal H. Effects of silicon coating on bond strength of two different titanium ceramic to titanium. Dent Mater. 2005;21(8):773–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Papadopoulos TD, Spyropoulos KD. The effect of a ceramic coating on the cpTi-porcelain bond strength. Dent Mater. 2009;25(2):247–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bondioli IR, Bottino MA. Evaluation of shear bond strength at the interface of two porcelains and pure titanium injected into the casting mold at three different temperatures. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;91(6):541–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Esquivel JF, Chai J, Wozniak WT. The physical properties of low-fusing porcelains for titanium. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9(6):563–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vasquez V, Özcan M, Nishioka R, Souza R, Mesquita A, Pavanelli C. Mechanical and thermal cycling effects on the flexural strength of glass ceramics fused to titanium. Dent Mater J. 2008;27(1):7–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kimmich M, Stappert CF. Intraoral treatment of veneering porcelain chipping of fixed dental restorations: a review and clinical application. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013;144(1):31–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Özcan M, Niedermeier W. Clinical study of the reasons for and location of failures of metal-ceramic restorations and survival of repairs. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15(3):299–302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Özcan M, Kumbuloglu O. Effect of composition, viscosity and thickness of the opaquer on the adhesion of resin composite to titanium. Dent Mater. 2009;25(10):1248–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Özcan M, Valandro L. Effect of silane coupling agents and alloy primers on adhesion to titanium. Minerva Stomatol. 2011;60(9):427–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Reyes MJ, Oshida Y, Andres CJ, Barco T, Hovijitra S, Brown D. Titanium-porcelain system. Part III: effects of surface modification on bond strengths. Biomed Mater Eng. 2001;11(2):117–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Carpenter MA, Goodkind RJ. Effect of varying surface texture on bond strength of one semiprecious and one nonprecious ceramo-alloy. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;42:86–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Chakmakchi M, Eliades G, Zinelis S. Bonding agents of low fusing cpTi porcelains: elemental and morphological characterization. J Prosthodont Res. 2009;53(4):166–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Wang CS, Chen KK, Tajima K, Nagamatsu Y, Kakigawa H, Kozono Y. Effects of sandblasting media and steam cleaning on bond strength of titanium-porcelain. Dent Mater J. 2010;29(4):381–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Papadopoulos T, Tsetsekou A, Eliades G. Effect of aluminium oxide sandblasting on cast commercially pure titanium surfaces. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 1999;7(1):15–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Galo R, Ribeiro RF, Rodrigues RC, Pagnano Vde O, Mattos MG. Effect of laser welding on the titanium ceramic tensile bond strength. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19(4):301–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kim JT, Cho SA. The effects of laser etching on shear bond strength at the titanium ceramic interface. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(2):101–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.•
    Akin H, Tugut F, Topcuoglu S, Kirmali O. Effects of sandblasting and laser irradiation on shear bond strength of low-fusing porcelain to titanium. J Adhes Dent. 2013;15(1):55–63. This in vitro study proposed different laser irradiation parameters for titanium surface preparation prior to porcelain application, exploring their effect on porcelain bonding. The manuscript provides clear laser etching parameters guidelines for achieving optimal results.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Troia Jr MG, Henriques GE, Mesquita MF, Fragoso WS. The effect of surface modifications on titanium to enable titanium-porcelain bonding. Dent Mater. 2008;24(1):28–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Elsaka SE, Swain MV. Effect of surface treatments on adhesion of low-fusing porcelain to titanium as determined by strain energy release rate. Dent Mater. 2011;27(12):1213–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Cai Z, Bunce N, Nunn ME, Okabe T. Porcelain adherence to dental cast CP titanium: effects of surface modifications. Biomaterials. 2001;22(9):979–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kimura H, Horng CJ, Okazaki M, Takahashi J. Oxidation effects on porcelain-titanium interface reactions and bond strength. Dent Mater J. 1990;9(1):91–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Zhang CC, Ye JT, Zhang YP, Liao JK, Li BH. Effect of titanium preoxidation on wrought pure titanium to ceramic bond strength. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):106–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Curtis JG, Dossett J, Prihoda TJ, Teixeira EC. Effect of bonding agent application method on titanium-ceramic bond strength. J Prosthodont. 2014;00:1–7. doi: 10.1111/jopr.122234.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Suansuwan N, Swain MV. New approach for evaluating metal-porcelain interfacial bonding. Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(6):547–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Tholey MJ, Waddell JN, Swain MV. Influence of the bonder on the adhesion of porcelain to machined titanium as determined by the strain energy release rate. Dent Mater. 2007;23(7):822–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Yamada K, Onizuka T, Endo K, Ohno H, Swain MV. The influence of Goldbonder and pre-heat treatment on the adhesion of titanium alloy and porcelain. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(3):213–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Homann F, Waddell JN, Swain MV. Influence of water, loading rate and bonder on the adhesion of porcelain to titanium. J Dent. 2006;34(7):485–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Lin MC, Huang HH. Improvement in dental porcelain bonding to milled, noncast titanium surfaces by gold sputter coating. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(7):540–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.•
    Khung R, Suansuwan NS. Effect of gold sputtering on the adhesion of porcelain to cast and machined titanium. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(1):41–6. This in vitro study showed approximately 56% of porcelain bond enhancement (as determined by strain energy release rate) when cast and machined titanium were sputter coated with gold.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Sadeq A, Cai Z, Woody RD, Miller AW. Effects of interfacial variables on ceramic adherence to cast and machined commercially pure titanium. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Zhang Z, Zhang P, Guo L, Guo T, Yang J. Effect of TiO2–SiO2 sol–gel coating on the cpTi–porcelain bond strength. Mater Lett. 2011;65(7):1082–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.•
    Wang A, Ge C, Yin H, Gao Y, Jiang T, Xia C, et al. Evolution of silica coating layer on titanium surface and the effect on the bond strength between titanium and porcelain. Appl Surf Sci. 2013;276:723–30. This in vitro study proposed an alternative method for chemical deposition of SiO 2 coating on titanium surfaces. The results showed significant porcelain bond enhancement compared to uncoated titanium.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Park S, Kim Y, Lim H, Oh G, Kim H, Ong JL, et al. Gold and titanium nitride coatings on cast and machined commercially pure titanium to improve titanium–porcelain adhesion. Surf Coat Technol. 2009;203(20–21):3243–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Elsaka SE, Hamouda IM, Elewady YA, Abouelatta OB, Swain MV. Influence of chromium interlayer on the adhesion of porcelain to machined titanium as determined by the strain energy release rate. J Dent. 2010;38(8):648–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.•
    Wang G, Wang X, Zhao Y, Guo T. Effect of a magnetron-sputtered ZrSiN/ZrO2 film on the bond strength of commercially pure titanium to porcelain. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(5):313–8. This in vitro study introduced an alternative titanium surface coating, exploring its effect on porcelain bonding. The results showed improved porcelain bonding compared to the uncoated specimens.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.•
    Marcelli E, Costantino ML, Villa T, Bagnoli P, Zannoli R, Corazza I, et al. Effect of intermediate ZrO2-CaO coatings deposited by cold thermal spraying on the titanium-porcelain bond in dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1201–11. This in vitro study introduced an alternative titanium surface coating, exploring its effect on porcelain bonding. The results showed improved porcelain bonding compared to the uncoated specimens.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Guo L, Tian J, Wu J, Li B, Zhu Y, Xu C, et al. Effect of nano-porous film on the bonding strength of titanium–porcelain. Mater Lett. 2013;109:140–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.•
    Guo L, Chen X, Liu X, Feng W, Li B, Lin C, et al. Surface modifications and Nano-composite coatings to improve the bonding strength of titanium-porcelain. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;61:143–8. This in vitro study explored the effect of titanium anodization on the porcelain bond strength, modifying the coating procedure compared to a previously published study and thereby achieving better results.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.•
    Aslan MA, Ural C, Arici S. Investigation of the effect of titanium alloy surface coating with different techniques on titanium-porcelain bonding. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(1):115–22. This in vitro study explored the effect of titanium micro-arc oxidation and hydroxyapatite coating on the porcelain bond strength. The results showed that titanium coating with either of these two proposed coatings provided enhanced porcelain bonding.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Li J-X, Zhang Y-M, Han Y, Zhao Y-M. Effects of micro-arc oxidation on bond strength of titanium to porcelain. Surf Coat Technol. 2010;204(8):1252–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Toptan F, Alves AC, Henriques B, Souza JC, Coelho R, Silva FS, et al. Influence of the processing route of porcelain/Ti-6Al-4V interfaces on shear bond strength. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2013;20:327–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations