Impact of different adhesives on work of adhesion between CAD/CAM polymers and resin composite cements

To determine the impact of pre-treatment of adhesive systems on the work of adhesion (WA) between CAD/CAM polymers and resin composite cements and compare with conventional tests of previous studies.

Surface parameters were measured by contact angle measurement (2700 measurements) and WA was calculated. Five CAD/CAM polymers were used for fabrication of specimens (n=75/subgroup): artBloc Temp (A), Telio CAD (B), Nano Composite CFI-C (C), exp. CAD/CAM nanohybrid composite (D), and LAVA Ultimate (E). Then, air-abraded specimens were pre-treated (n=15 per group): Ambarino P60 (I), Monobond Plus/Heliobond (II), visio.link (III), VP connect (IV), and no pre-treatment (V). Resin composite cement specimens (n=75) were smoothed out homogeneously on a glass plate (n=15/group): RelyX ARC (RXA), Variolink II (VAR), Panavia F2.0 (PAN), RelyX Unicem (RXU), and Clearfil SA Cement (CSA). Contact angles were determined with 3 drops of distilled water and diiodomethane each. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis-H test and Spearman-Rho correlation (p<0.05).

CAD/CAM materials (B), (A), and (C) showed higher WA compared to (D) and (E). (II) and (IV) resulted in higher WA than (I), (III) and (V). VAR had the significantly lowest WA, followed by RXU, RXA, CSA and PAN. No correlation occurred between WA and TBS/SBS whereas polar component of surface free energy of CAD/CAM resin and spreading coefficient showed significant positive correlation with TBS/SBS.

Determination of WA is not a proper method to draw conclusions about the bond between resin materials. Destructive test methods are not dispensable.

The successful outcome of fixed dental restorations depends, among others, on the quality of bonding between the tooth and the restoration. Additional pre-treatment of the dental CAD/CAM resin restoration by bonding systems can be recommended for clinical use. Pre-treatment showed a significant impact on the surface properties.