Comparação da resistência de união à microtração de sistemas cerâmicos odontológicos bilaminares

• Ano de defesa: 2014
• Autor(a) principal: Fracasso, Lisiane Martins
• Orientador(a): Mota, Eduardo Gonçalves
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Odontologia
• Departamento: Faculdade de Odontologia
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: ODONTOLOGIA; MATERIAIS DENTÁRIOS; CERÂMICA DENTÁRIA; RESISTÊNCIA DOS MATERIAIS (ODONTOLOGIA); MATERIAIS CERÂMICOS (RESISTÊNCIA DOS MATERIAIS)
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::ODONTOLOGIA
• Link de acesso: http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/1238

The introduction of ceramics in dentistry occurred since the eighteenth century through the use in complete denture. Bilayered systems composed by metal and ceramic emerged from the 60s and the interest in ceramic systems composed by a ceramic infrastructure that provides resistance associated with an aesthetic cover ceramic becomes evident in the last decades of the past century. Thus, different types of ceramics were inserted in the dental commerce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength of three systems of all-ceramics: E- max Press, In-Ceram Zirconia and Mark II with its respectively veneering porcelain. Samples were prepared by using a conformer of ceramic samples and included in the center of a ring of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Three samples of each system were cut into microbars of a square millimeter in cross section. Five specimens of each sample were randomly selected for the microtensile bon strength test (n = 14). An Universal Testing Machine with 0,5mm/min was used for the microtensile bond strength test. Data were statistically analyzed using the G * Power 3.1.7 software. The distribution of normality was analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test (E- max Press, p = 0,96; In-Ceram Zirconia, p = 0,25, Mark II, p = 0,56). There were no homogeneity between samples when was used Levene test (p = 0,01). For this reason, the data were submitted to analysis of variance test followed by multiple comparison Games-Howell test. There was statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0,01), and E-max Press (17,88a ± 5,92 MPa) showed higher resistance to the other groups, followed by Mark II (12,98b ± 4,21 MPa) and In-Ceram Zirconia (9.44c ± 2.25 MPa). Therefore, there is a significant difference between the union of infrastructure and coverage in the different systems, which may influence longevity of these restorations.