All ETDs from UAB

Advisory Committee Chair

Nathaniel C Lawson

Advisory Committee Members

John O Burgess

Jack E Lemons

Amjad Javed

Ramakiran Chavali

Document Type

Thesis

Date of Award

2017

Degree Name by School

Master of Science in Dentistry (MScD) School of Dentistry

Abstract

Objectives: Resin composite CAM materials offer more efficient milling, however, there is a high incidence of clinical debonding when this material is used for full-coverage crowns. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effect of different surface treat-ments and primers on the crown retention of a new resin composite CAM material. Methods: 120 molars were prepared with a 24 degree taper, 1.5mm height, and axial walls in dentin. Surface area was measured by digital microscopy and preparations were scanned with an intraoral scanner. Crowns were milled from an experimental com-posite material with 4mm occlusal height. Teeth were randomly allocated to 12 groups (n= 10) based on the possible combinations of three surface treatments (Control, Alumina air abrasion [50µm Al2O3 at 0.28MPa], Hydrofluoric acid etch [5% HF acid for 20 sec]), silane application (with or without Kerr Silane), and adhesive application (with or without Optibond XTR adhesive). Optibond XTR adhesive was applied to the tooth preparations and crowns were bonded with MaxCem Elite. Crowns were fatigued for 100,000 cycles at 100N in water. Crowns were debonded in tension in a universal testing machine at 1mm/min. Crown retention strength (maximum load/area of preparation) was analyzed using a three-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc tests. Results: Surface treatment, silane and adhesive applications independently affect the retention force (p<0.05). All interactions were not statistically significant. Alumina airborne abrasion surface treatment, silane and adhesive applications all boost retention strength. Conclusions: Resin composite crowns should be alumina particle abraded and coated with silane and adhesive.

Included in

Dentistry Commons

Share

COinS