The effect of different surface treatments on roughnessand bond strength in low fusing ceramics

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different surface treatments (air abrasion, acid etching, and laser irradiation) on the surface roughness and bond strength of a low fusing ceramic. Thirty-six discs of low fusing ceramic (Finesse, Ceramco) were prepared (10 mm in diameter and 2...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Lasers in medical science 2011-09, Vol.26 (5), p.599-604
Main Authors: Kara, Haluk Baris, Nilgun Ozturk, A., Aykent, Filiz, Koc, Ozlem, Ozturk, Bora
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Dentistry
Lasers
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Optical Devices
Optics
Original Article
Photonics
Quantum Optics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different surface treatments (air abrasion, acid etching, and laser irradiation) on the surface roughness and bond strength of a low fusing ceramic. Thirty-six discs of low fusing ceramic (Finesse, Ceramco) were prepared (10 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Specimens were divided into three groups ( n  = 12), and the following treatments were performed: Air abrasion with alumina particles (50 μm), acid etching with 5% HF and Nd:YAG laser irradiation (distance: 1 mm, 100 mJ, 20 Hz, 2 W, and 141.54 J/cm 2 ). Following determination of surface roughness (R a ) by profilometry, specimens were examined with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The luting cement (Clearfil Esthetic Cement) was bonded to the ceramic specimens using Teflon tubes. After 24 h of water storage, shear bond strength test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD tests (α = .05). Two-way ANOVA indicated that surface roughness was significantly affected by surface treatments ( p  
ISSN:0268-8921
1435-604X
DOI:10.1007/s10103-010-0806-9