Effect of Ceramic Conditioners on Surface Morphology, Roughness, Contact Angle, Adhesion, Microstructure, and Composition of CAD/CAM Ceramics

Abstract

SUMMARY The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of surface treatments in maximum profile valley depth (Rv), surface roughness (Sa), contact angle (Ca), shear bond strength (SBS) of a light-cured resin cement, microstructure, and composition of two CAD/CAM ceramics: Cerec Blocs/Dentsply Sirona (feldspathic - FEL) and Empress CAD/Ivoclar Vivadent (leucite-reinforced - LEU). The ceramic specimens were submitted to six surface treatments: (1) 5% hydrofluoric acid (HF) – 20 seconds; (2) 5% HF – 60 seconds; (3) 10% HF – 20 seconds; (4) 10% HF – 60 seconds; (5) self-etching ceramic primer (MEP) – 20 seconds; and (6) MEP – 60 seconds. Specimens treated with HF received silane application for 1 minute. Rv and Sa were evaluated in a confocal laser microscope (n=10) and the Ca in a goniometer (n=6). For the SBS test, two resin cement cylinders were bonded to each specimen, one tested after 24 hours in distilled water storage (37°C) and the other after one year (n=10). The microstructures and compositions were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) (n=4). Rv, Sa, and Ca data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA, and the SBS data by three-way ANOVA, all followed by post-hoc Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Results: Surface treatments with HF always produced higher Rv and Sa, and lower Ca than MEP 60s for both ceramics. After 1-year water storage, FEL ceramic treated with MEP for 60 seconds produced higher SBS values than HF treatments, whereas for LEU ceramic there were no differences among treatments. Application of MEP for 20 or 60 seconds produced no difference in Rv, Sa, Ca, and SBS for both ceramics. Surface treatments produced considerable differences in ceramic topography, but subtle ones in composition, for both ceramics. Conclusions: The results indicated that for FEL ceramic, MEP application for 60 seconds yielded higher SBS compared with HF etching, while for LEU ceramic the surface treatments did not influence the SBS results.