HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fleming, G.J.P. Articles by Marquis, P.M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fleming, G.J.P. Articles by Marquis, P.M.

The Strengthening Mechanism of Resin Cements on Porcelain Surfaces

¹ Biomaterials Unit, School of Dentistry, University of Birmingham, St. Chad’s Queensway, Birmingham B4 6NN, UK; and
² Department of Restorative Dentistry, Cork University Dental School & Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Republic of Ireland

View larger version (45K): [in a new window]   Figure 1. Representative profilometry traces of the controlled defect populations, namely, (a) the indented (group B) and (b) the ground (group A) aluminous core porcelain surfaces examined in the current study.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Figure 2. Survival probability distributions of (a) the dry ground and dry indented [m = 171.7 (11.7) and 104.6 (11.9), groups A and B, respectively] and wet ground and wet indented [m = 105.7 (12.0) and 80.4 (9.8), groups C and D, respectively] control defect populations for n = 20 specimens per group. m is the mean fracture strength, and the numbers in parentheses are standard deviations highlighting the significant strength reduction on immersion. Survival probability distributions of (b) the dry, wet, acid-etched and acid-etched and silane indented controls [m = 104.6 (11.9), 80.4 (9.8), 79.9 (5.2), and 81.8 (7.0) (groups C, D, I, and J, respectively], highlighting that no effect was evident following acid-etching.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Figure 3. Survival probability distributions of the ground and indented porcelain surfaces coated with the resin cement (a) Compolute® Aplicap® [m = 130.8 (14.1) and 113.9 (10.7), for groups E and F, respectively] and (b) Unicem® Aplicap® [m = 180.9 (19.9) and 155.7 (20.7), groups G and H, respectively], highlighting the significant strength increase compared with that of the wet ground and indented controls (m is the mean fracture strength, and the numbers in parentheses are standard deviations for n = 20 specimens per group).