Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of preheating resin-based materials and ultrasound application on the failure load of a lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety ceramic specimens were produced (14×12×1.0 mm) and divided into 9 groups (n = 10) to be bonded to a dentin analog (Nema G10) with light-cured luting agent (LC), flowable resin composite (FL), and supra-nano filled resin composite (SN), as follows: LC/R - LC at room temperature; LC/P - preheated LC; LC/P/U - preheated LC and Ultrasound; FL/R - FL at room temperature; FL/P - preheated FL; FL/P/U - preheated FL and Ultrasound; SN/R - SN at room temperature; SN/P - preheated SN; SN/P/U - preheated SN and Ultrasound. The failure load test was performed in a universal testing machine with the aid of acoustic detection. The data was analyzed with two-way ANOVA (for failure load) and Weibull statistics (Weibull modulus - m and characteristic strength, based on 95% confidence intervals - CI). RESULTS: The analyses of failure load revealed no statistically significant difference among groups considering the type of luting agent (P = 0.075; F = 2,673), the application method (P = 0.772; F = 2,259), and the interaction between them (P = 0.297; F = 1,248). The characteristic strength did not show differences among groups (95% CI). The m, which indicates structural reliability, showed lower values for SN/P/U and SN/P, with a difference from other selected groups (95% CI). CONCLUSION: Preheating of resin-based materials and ultrasound application did not affect the failure load of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. Lower reliability was observed with supra-nano filled resin composite.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Figueiredo et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: