Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2019; 13(01): 075-081
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1688535
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Effect of Different Neutralizing Agents on Feldspathic Porcelain Etched by Hydrofluoric Acid

Tool Sriamporn
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Rangsit University, Pathumthani, Thailand
,
Ploypim Kraisintu
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Rangsit University, Pathumthani, Thailand
,
Lily Pachanin See
2   Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Rangsit University, Pathumthani, Thailand
,
Somporn Swasdison
3   Department of Oral Diagnostic Science, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Rangsit University, Pathumthani, Thailand
,
Awiruth Klaisiri
4   Division of Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
,
Niyom Thamrongananskul
5   Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
06 June 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of neutralizing agents on the shear bond strength of hydrofluoric (HF)–etched porcelain in nonaging and aging conditions.

Subjects and Methods One hundred and twenty feldspathic porcelain specimens were prepared and divided into six groups to undergo different surface conditioning methods—group 1: control; group 2: HF; group 3: HF + calcium hydroxide; group 4: HF + calcium carbonate; group 5: HF + calcium gluconate; and group 6: HF + ultrasonic. All samples were immersed in 37°C distilled water for 24 h. Half of the samples were thermocycled in water for 5,000 cycles. The shear bond strength test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison test at a 95% confidence level. The surface micromorphology and surface elements were analyzed using scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), respectively.

Results The shear bond strengths of groups 2–6 were significantly higher than the control group in both aging and nonaging conditions (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences among all of the HF-etched porcelain groups (p > 0.05). SEM images of groups 2–6 illustrated similar patterns of irregularity on the specimen surfaces. Elemental analysis of EDX demonstrated identical elements on surfaces of specimens of groups 2–6.

Conclusion Within the limitations of this study, shear bond strength values between HF-etched porcelain, HF-etching followed by application of neutralizing agents, and HF-etching followed by ultrasonic cleaning were not significantly different in both nonaging and aging conditions.

Keywords

dental porcelain - hydrofluoric acid - neutralizing agents - restoration repair - surface treatment
 

  • References

  • 1 Ho GW, Matinlinna JP. Insights on ceramics as dental materials. Part I: ceramic material types in dentistry. Silicon 2011; 3 (03) 109-115
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rashid H. The effect of surface roughness on ceramics used in dentistry: a review of literature. Eur J Dent 2014; 8 (04) 571-579
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ozcan M. Fracture reasons in ceramic-fused-to-metal restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2003; 30 (03) 265-269
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pameijer CH, Louw NP, Fischer D. Repairing fractured porcelain: how surface preparation affects shear force resistance. J Am Dent Assoc 1996; 127 (02) 203-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Matinlinna JP, Lung CYK, Tsoi JKH. Silane adhesion mechanism in dental applications and surface treatments: A review. Dent Mater 2018; 34 (01) 13-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Reston EG, Filho SC, Arossi G, Cogo RB, Rocha CdosS, Closs LQ. Repairing ceramic restorations: final solution or alternative procedure?. Oper Dent 2008; 33 (04) 461-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 da Cunha LF, Reis R, Santana L, Romanini JC, Carvalho RM, Furuse AY. Ceramic veneers with minimum preparation. Eur J Dent 2013; 7 (04) 492-496
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Zaghloul H, Elkassas DW, Haridy MF. Effect of incorporation of silane in the bonding agent on the repair potential of machinable esthetic blocks. Eur J Dent 2014; 8 (01) 44-52
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Tian T, Tsoi JK, Matinlinna JP, Burrow MF. Aspects of bonding between resin luting cements and glass ceramic materials. Dent Mater 2014; 30 (07) e147-e162
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Naves LZ, Soares CJ, Moraes RR, Gonçalves LS, Sinhoreti MA, Correr-Sobrinho L. Surface/interface morphology and bond strength to glass ceramic etched for different periods. Oper Dent 2010; 35 (04) 420-427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Barghi N, Fischer DE, Vatani L. Effects of porcelain leucite content, types of etchants, and etching time on porcelain-composite bond. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006; 18 (01) 47-52 discussion 53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bertolini JC. Hydrofluoric acid: a review of toxicity. J Emerg Med 1992; 10 (02) 163-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ho GW, Matinlinna JP. Insights on ceramics as dental materials. Part II: Chemical surface treatments. Silicon 2011; 3 (03) 117-123
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wang X, Zhang Y, Ni L. et al. A review of treatment strategies for hydrofluoric acid burns: current status and future prospects. Burns 2014; 40 (08) 1447-1457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Panah FG, Rezai SM, Ahmadian L. The influence of ceramic surface treatments on the micro-shear bond strength of composite resin to IPS Empress 2. J Prosthodont 2008; 17 (05) 409-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bottino MA, Snellaert A, Bergoli CD, Özcan M, Bottino MC, Valandro LF. Effect of ceramic etching protocols on resin bond strength to a feldspar ceramic. Oper Dent 2015; 40 (02) E40-E46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Amaral R, Ozcan M, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Resin bonding to a feldspar ceramic after different ceramic surface conditioning methods: evaluation of contact angle, surface pH, and microtensile bond strength durability. J Adhes Dent 2011; 13 (06) 551-560
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Saavedra G, Ariki EK, Federico CD. et al. Effect of acid neutralization and mechanical cycling on the microtensile bond strength of glass-ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 2009; 34 (02) 211-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Matinlinna JP, Vallittu PK. Bonding of resin composites to etchable ceramic surfaces - an insight review of the chemical aspects on surface conditioning. J Oral Rehabil 2007; 34 (08) 622-630
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Chen JH, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Effect of etchant, etching period, and silane priming on bond strength to porcelain of composite resin. Oper Dent 1998; 23 (05) 250-257
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lung CY, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: an overview. Dent Mater 2012; 28 (05) 467-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ozcan M, Allahbeickaraghi A, Dündar M. Possible hazardous effects of hydrofluoric acid and recommendations for treatment approach: a review. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16 (01) 15-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Özcan M, Volpato CA. Surface conditioning protocol for the adhesion of resin-based materials to glassy matrix ceramics: how to condition and why?. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17 (03) 292-293
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Canay S, Hersek N, Ertan A. Effect of different acid treatments on a porcelain surface. J Oral Rehabil 2001; 28 (01) 95-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Martins ME, Leite FP, Queiroz JR, Vanderlei AD, Reskalla HN, Ozcan M. Does the ultrasonic cleaning medium affect the adhesion of resin cement to feldspathic ceramic?. J Adhes Dent 2012; 14 (06) 507-509
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Alex G. Preparing porcelain surfaces for optimal bonding. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2008; 29 (06) 324-335 quiz 336
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Steinhauser HC, Turssi CP, Franca FM, Amaral FL, Basting RT. Micro-shear bond strength and surface micromorphology of a feldspathic ceramic treated with different cleaning methods after hydrofluoric acid etching. J Appl Oral Sci 2014; 22 (02) 85-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 de Melo RM, Valandro LF, Bottino MA. Microtensile bond strength of a repair composite to leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic. Braz Dent J 2007; 18 (04) 314-319
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sundfeld Neto D, Naves LZ, Costa AR. et al. The effect of hydrofluoric acid concentration on the bond strength and morphology of the surface and interface of glass ceramics to a resin cement. Oper Dent 2015; 40 (05) 470-479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 1999; 27 (02) 89-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Yoo JY, Yoon HI, Park JM, Park EJ. Porcelain repair—Influence of different systems and surface treatments on resin bond strength. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7 (05) 343-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar