To investigate the tensile bond strength between zirconia abutments and titanium bases, luted with two different resin composite cements, after different cleaning procedures.
Material and methods:
Zirconia abutments and titanium bases were luted with either a DMA/HEMA-based cement (n = 80; Multilink Hybrid Abutment, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-based cement (n = 80; Panavia V5, Kuraray Noritake). The adhesive gap of half of the specimens was polished (n = 40 per resin composite cement). Four separate specimens underwent roughness measurements and scanning electron microscopy. The specimens were divided into four groups (n = 10 per subgroup): (1) not cleaned, (2) cleaning in an ultrasonic bath, (3) cleaning in an autoclave, and (4) treatment with low-pressure plasma. The specimens were thermocycled (20,000×, 5°C/55°C), tensile bond strength was tested, and fracture types were analyzed. Data were examined using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, univariate ANOVA with additional partial eta-squared (ηp2), and the Mann-Whitney U test. The defined level of significance was adjusted by Bonferroni correction (P < .003).
The tensile bond strength of specimens luted with the DMA/HEMA-based cement was higher than that of specimens luted with the Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-based cement. The polishing step and the cleaning procedures showed no impact on tensile bond strength results. Specimens luted with the DMA/HEMA-based cement presented more cohesive fractures, whereas specimens luted with the Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-based cement presented themselves with more fractures of the interface between the resin composite cement and zirconia abutment. Ra values showed a decline in roughness after polishing for both resin composite cements.
As the DMA/HEMA-based cement showed higher tensile bond strength values, the usage of this resin composite cement for luting implant abutments to titanium bases can be recommended. Neither polishing nor the use of different cleaning procedures had an impact on tensile bond strength.