Resistência de união entre um cimento resinoso e uma cerâmica aluminizada submetida a diferentes tratamentos de superfície

• Ano de defesa: 2003
• Autor(a) principal: Soares, Luiz Felipe [UNESP]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
• Palavras-chave em Português: Cimentos dentarios; Cerâmicas odontológicas; Prótese dentária; Materiais dentários; Dental cements
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/132095; http://www.athena.biblioteca.unesp.br/exlibris/bd/cathedra/01-12-2015/000200273.pdf

This study evaluated the tensile bond strength of a resin cement to a ceramic after to three ceramic surface treatments. Five blocks of Procera AIICeram (6 mm X 6 mm X 15 mm) were fabricated. Each ceramic block was sectioned in 3 portions of 6 mm X 6 mm X 5 mm. The fifteen blocks were duplicata in resin composite (W3D Master); the ceramic surface was polished through 600, 800 and 1200 SiC grids, and the blocks were divided in 3 experimental groups: Group 1- Sandblasting with 110 µm Al203; Group 2- Rocatec System: Racatec-Pre, Plus and -Sil; and Group 3 - CoJet System: Sandblasting with 30µm silica particles + ESPE-Sil. The ceramic blocks were cemented to the resin composite blocks with resin cement (Panavia F), according to manufacturer's instructions, under a load of 750g for 10min. The cemented blocks were stored in 37°C distilled water for 7 days and sectioned in two axes, x and y, with a diamond disk under cooling water in order to obtain samples (sp) with a bonding area of 0,6 ± 0,1 mm2 (n=30). Each sp was attached to an adapted device for the microtensile test. This set was attached to a universal testing machine (EMIC DL-1000) and tested at crosshead speed of 1mm.min-1. The data were statisfically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test. The bond strength mean values (MPa) were: Group 1- 12.70; Group 2- 17.06 and Group 3- 18.52. G2 and G3 showed statistically significant higher bond strength values than G1. There was no statistical difference between G2 and G3 (p<0,05)