Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Effect of different surface pretreatments and adhesives on the load-bearing capacity of veneered 3-unit PEEK FDPs


Stawarczyk, Bogna; Thrun, Hadelinde; Eichberger, Marlis; Roos, Malgorzata; Edelhoff, Daniel; Schweiger, Josef; Schmidlin, Patrick R (2015). Effect of different surface pretreatments and adhesives on the load-bearing capacity of veneered 3-unit PEEK FDPs. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 114(5):666-673.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) can be used as a framework material for fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). However, information about the fracture load of veneered PEEK FDPs is still scarce. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of different PEEK surface pretreatments and adhesive systems on the fracture load of 2 differently veneered FDPs. MATERIAL AND METHODS Four hundred eighty anatomically shaped 3-unit PEEK frameworks were milled, airborne-particle abraded with 50 μm alumina powder, and divided into 4 groups according to the following surface pretreatment (n=120): plasma treatment, etching with either sulfuric acid or piranha solution, and no further treatment. All groups were then allocated to 4 conditioning groups: visio.link, Ambarino P60, Signum PEEK Bond, or no conditioning. They were veneered with Signum Composite (n=15) or Signum Ceramis (n=15). Upon completion, the FDPs were thermally aged, and fracture loads and failure types were determined. Statistical analysis was performed with 3/2/1-way ANOVA with the post hoc Tukey HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS The highest fracture loads were achieved without treatment in combination with visio.link (737 ±138 N). The lowest values were obtained after piranha acid etching and conditioning with visio.link (277 ±71 N); both groups were veneered with Signum Composite. The results, however, indicated no clear influence of either pretreatment or conditioning. With few exceptions, FDPs veneered with Signum Composite showed higher fracture load values compared to Signum Ceramis. After thermocycling, all FDPs showed cracks in the veneering composite resin material in the pontic region, regardless of the PEEK pretreatment or the adhesive system used. After loading, no fractures of the PEEK frameworks were evident in any FDPs, but chipping of the veneering material was observed. CONCLUSIONS With respect to the fracture types after thermocycling, pretreatment, conditioning, or veneering resin cement did not affect the fracture results.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) can be used as a framework material for fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). However, information about the fracture load of veneered PEEK FDPs is still scarce. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of different PEEK surface pretreatments and adhesive systems on the fracture load of 2 differently veneered FDPs. MATERIAL AND METHODS Four hundred eighty anatomically shaped 3-unit PEEK frameworks were milled, airborne-particle abraded with 50 μm alumina powder, and divided into 4 groups according to the following surface pretreatment (n=120): plasma treatment, etching with either sulfuric acid or piranha solution, and no further treatment. All groups were then allocated to 4 conditioning groups: visio.link, Ambarino P60, Signum PEEK Bond, or no conditioning. They were veneered with Signum Composite (n=15) or Signum Ceramis (n=15). Upon completion, the FDPs were thermally aged, and fracture loads and failure types were determined. Statistical analysis was performed with 3/2/1-way ANOVA with the post hoc Tukey HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS The highest fracture loads were achieved without treatment in combination with visio.link (737 ±138 N). The lowest values were obtained after piranha acid etching and conditioning with visio.link (277 ±71 N); both groups were veneered with Signum Composite. The results, however, indicated no clear influence of either pretreatment or conditioning. With few exceptions, FDPs veneered with Signum Composite showed higher fracture load values compared to Signum Ceramis. After thermocycling, all FDPs showed cracks in the veneering composite resin material in the pontic region, regardless of the PEEK pretreatment or the adhesive system used. After loading, no fractures of the PEEK frameworks were evident in any FDPs, but chipping of the veneering material was observed. CONCLUSIONS With respect to the fracture types after thermocycling, pretreatment, conditioning, or veneering resin cement did not affect the fracture results.

Statistics

Citations

7 citations in Web of Science®
7 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

49 downloads since deposited on 04 Dec 2015
47 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:November 2015
Deposited On:04 Dec 2015 10:37
Last Modified:08 Dec 2017 15:19
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0022-3913
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.06.006
PubMed ID:26344191

Download

Download PDF  'Effect of different surface pretreatments and adhesives on the load-bearing capacity of veneered 3-unit PEEK FDPs'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 3MB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)