The effect of various surface treatments on the repair bond strength of denture bases produced by digital and conventional methods


Şahin Z., Özer N. E., Akan T., Kılıçarslan M. A., Karaağaçlıoğlu L.

ODONTOLOGY / THE SOCIETY OF THE NIPPON DENTAL UNIVERSITY, cilt.112, sa.3, ss.782-797, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

Özet

There is limited information on the repairability of prostheses produced with digital technology. This study aims to evaluate various surface treatments on flexural bond strength of repaired dentured base resins produced by digital and conventional methods. A total of 360 samples were prepared from one heat-polymerized, one CAD/CAM milled and one 3D printed denture base materials. All of the test samples were subjected to thermocycling (5–55 °C, 5000 cycles) before and after repair with auto-polymerizing acrylic resin. The test samples were divided into five subgroups according to the surface treatment: grinding with silicon carbide (SC), sandblasting with Al2O3 (SB), Er:YAG laser (L), plasma (P) and negative control (NC) group (no treatment). In addition, the positive control (PC) group consisted of intact samples for the flexural strength test. Surface roughness measurements were performed with a profilometer. After repairing the test samples, a universal test device determined the flexural strength values. Both the surface topography and the fractured surfaces of samples were examined by SEM analysis. The elemental composition of the tested samples was analyzed by EDS. Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests were performed for statistical analysis of data. SB and L surface treatments statistically significantly increased the surface roughness values of all three materials compared to NC subgroups (p < 0.001). The flexural strength values of the PC groups in all three test materials were significantly higher than those of the other groups (p < 0.001). The repair flexural strength values were statistically different between the SC–SB, L–SB, and NC–SB subgroups for the CAD/CAM groups, and the L–SC and L–NC subgroups for the 3D groups (p < 0.001). The surface treatments applied to the CAD/CAM and heat-polymerized groups did not result in a statistically significant difference in the repair flexural strength values compared to the NC groups (p > 0.05). Laser surface treatment has been the most powerful repair method for 3D printing technique. Surface treatments led to similar repair flexural strengths to untreated groups for CAD/CAM milled and heat-polymerized test samples.