Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of different pretreatment methods of PMMA-based crowns on the long-term tensile bond strength to dentin abutments

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of the study was to test the effect of different pretreatments on tensile bond strength (TBS) of adhesively bonded CAD/CAM-generated polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) crowns to dentin.

Materials and methods

Two hundred human molars were prepared and divided into 20 groups (n = 10/group). PMMA crowns were pretreated thusly: Monobond Plus/Heliobond (MH), Visio.link (VL), Ambarino P60 (AM), VP connect (VP), and nontreated as control groups (CG). Two resin cements were used for cementation of crowns: Clearfil SA Cement (CSA) and Variolink II (VAR). TBS was measured initially (24 h water storage, 37 °C) and after aging (5,000 thermal cycles, 5/55 °C). TBS was analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Scheffé post hoc, unpaired Student t, Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis H, and chi-squared tests.

Results

Within CSA, pretreatment with MH and VL showed higher initial TBS compared with AM-treated groups. All other groups showed no statistical differences. For MH, VL, AM, and VP in combination with CSA, a negative impact of aging was observed (p < 0.001), whereas in all VAR groups, no impact was measured. Pretreatment with MH (p = 0.001) and VP (p = 0.008) presented higher initial TBS for CSA than for VAR. After aging, MH (p = 0.025) and VL (p = 0.034) cemented with VAR showed higher results than CSA.

Conclusions

All tested groups showed very low TBS values. Pretreatments with MH, VL, and VP have minimally improved the tensile strength after aging.

Clinical relevance

Although the tensile strength results were low, crowns adhesively cemented with pretreatments with MH, VL, and VP showed, after aging, a higher tensile strength than nontreated groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Edelhoff D, Beuer F, Schweiger J, Brix O, Stimmelmayr M, Güth JF (2012) CAD/CAM-generated high-density polymer restorations for the pretreatment of complex cases: a case report. Quintessence Int 43:457–467

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rocca GT, Bonnafous F, Rizcalla N, Krejci I (2010) A technique to improve the esthetic aspects of CAD/CAM composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1004:273–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nguyen JF, Migonney V, Ruse ND, Sadoun M (2012) Resin composite blocks via high-pressure high-temperature polymerization. Dent Mater 28:529–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Alt V, Hannig M, Wöstmann B, Balkenhol M (2011) Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations. Dent Mater 27:339–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Balkenhol M, Mautner MC, Ferger P, Wöstmann B (2008) Mechanical properties of provisional crown and bridge materials: chemical-curing versus dual curing systems. J Dent 36:15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Göncü Basaran E, Ayna E, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV (2011) Load-bearing capacity of handmade and computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing-fabricated tree-unit fixed dental prostheses of particulate filler composite. Acta Odontol Scand 69:144–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Trottmann A, Özcan M, Fischer J, Hämmerle CH (2012) Load-bearing capacity of CAD/CAM milled polymeric three-unit fixed dental prostheses: effect of aging regimens. Clin Oral Investig 16:1669–1677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wimmer T, Ender A, Roos M, Stawarczyk B (2013) Fracture load of milled polymeric fixed dental prostheses as a function of connector cross-sectional areas. J Prosthet Dent 110:288–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Attia A, Abdelaziz KM, Freitag S, Kern M (2006) Fracture load of composite resin and feldspatic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns. J Prosthet Dent 95:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Magne P, Knezevic A (2009) Simulated fatigue resistance of composite resin versus porcelain CAD/CAM overlay restorations on endodontically treated molars. Quintessence Int 40:125–133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stawarczyk B, Sener B, Trottmann A, Roos M, Özcan M, Hämmerle CH (2012) Discoloration of manually fabricated resins and industrially fabricated CAD/CAM blocks versus glass-ceramic: effect of storage media, duration and subsequent polishing. Dent Mater J 31:377–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Stawarczyk B, Özcan M, Trottmann A, Schmutz F, Roos M, Hämmerle C (2013) Two-body wear rate of CAD/CAM resin blocks and their enamel antagonists. J Prosthet Dent 109:325–332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Anusavice KJ, Philips R (2003) Philips’ science of dental materials, 11th edn. Elsevier, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lin CL, Chang YH, Liu PR (2008) Multi-factorial analysis of a cusp-replacing adhesive premolar restoration: a finite element study. J Dent 36:194–203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Krämer N, Kunzelmann KH, Taschner M, Mehl A, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R (2006) Antagonist enamel wears more than ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 85:1097–1100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giordano R (2006) Materials for chairside CAD/CAM-produced restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 137:14S–21S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Güth JF, Almeida E, Silva JS, Ramberger M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D (2012) Treatment concept with CAD/CAM-fabricated high-density polymer temporary restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 24:310–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stawarczyk B, Basler T, Ender A, Roos M, Özcan M, Hämmerle C (2012) Effect of surface conditioning with airborne-particle abrasion on the tensile strength of polymeric CAD/CAM crowns luted with self-adhesive and conventional resin cements. J Prosthet Dent 107:94–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Stawarczyk B, Hartmann L, Hartmann R, Roos M, Ender A, Ozcan M, Sailer I, Hämmerle CH (2012) Impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the tensile strength of zirconia crowns bonded to dentin: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 16:201–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Stawarczyk B, Trottmann A, Hämmerle CH, Özcan M (2013) Adhesion of veneering resins to polymethylmethacrylate-based CAD/CAM polymers after various surface conditioning methods. Acta Odontol Scand 71:1142–1148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bähr N, Keul C, Edelhoff D, Eichberger M, Roos M, Gernet W, Stawarczyk B (2013) Effect of different adhesives combined with two resin composite cements on shear bond strength to polymeric CAD/CAM materials. Dent Mater J 32:492–501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ernst CP, Wenzl N, Stender E, Willershausen B (1998) Retentive strengths of cast gold crowns using glass ionomer, compomer, or resin cement. J Prosthet Dent 79:472–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ernst CP, Cohnen U, Stender E, Willershausen B (2005) In vitro retentive strength of zirconia oxide ceramic crowns using different luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 93:551–558

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yim NH, Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Gardner FM, Pashley DH (2000) Effect of dentin desensitizers and cementing agents on retention of full crowns using standardized crown preparation. J Prosthet Dent 83:459–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Palacios RP, Johnson GH, Phillips KM, Raigrodski AJ (2006) Retention of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns with three types of cement. J Prosthet Dent 96:104–114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lührs AK, Guhr S, Günay H, Geurtsen W (2010) Shear bond strength of self-adhesive resins compared to resin cements with etch and rinse adhesives to enamel and dentin in vitro. Clin Oral Investig 14:193–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Suyama Y, de Munck J, Cardoso MV, Yamada T, Van Meerbeek B (2013) Bond durability of self-adhesive composite cements to dentine. J Dent 41:908–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Palmer DS, Barco MT, Billy EJ (1992) Temperature extremes produced orally by hot and cold liquids. J Prosthet Dent 67:325–327

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Longman CM, Pearson CJ (1984) Variation in temperature of the oral cavity during the imbibition of hot and cold fluids [special issue]. J Dent Res 63:521

    Google Scholar 

  30. Boehm RF (1972) Thermal environment of teeth during open mouth respiration. J Dent Res 51:75–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pröbster L, Maiwald U, Weber H (1996) Three-point bending strength of ceramics fused to cast titanium. Eur J Oral Sci 104:313–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Leibrock H, Degenhart M, Behr M, Rosentritt M, Handel G (1999) In vitro study on the effect of thermo-and load-cycling on the bond strength of porcelain repair systems. J Oral Rehabil 26:130–137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC, Sorensen JA (2004) In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 92:265–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nakamura T, Wakabayashi K, Kinuta S, Nishida H, Miyamae M, Yatani H (2010) Mechanical properties of new self-adhesive resin-based cement. J Prosthodont Res 54:59–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Torstenson B, Brannström M (1988) Contraction gap under composite resin restorations: effect of hygroscopic expansion and thermal stress. Oper Dent 13:24–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Merz Dental, Ivoclar Vivadent, Bredent, Creamed, and Kuraray for supporting this study with materials.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, Dental School, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany

    Christine Keul, Daliah Kohen, Marlis Eichberger, Wolfgang Gernet & Bogna Stawarczyk

  2. Division of Biostatistics, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Zurich, Hirschgraben 84, 8001, Zurich, Switzerland

    Malgorzata Roos

Authors
  1. Christine Keul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daliah Kohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marlis Eichberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Malgorzata Roos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wolfgang Gernet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bogna Stawarczyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bogna Stawarczyk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Keul, C., Kohen, D., Eichberger, M. et al. The effect of different pretreatment methods of PMMA-based crowns on the long-term tensile bond strength to dentin abutments. Clin Oral Invest 19, 35–43 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1215-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1215-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation