Effect of Type of Surface Treatment and Adhesive System on Shear Bond Strength of Composite Resin to a Non-Precious Metal Alloy

Fractured metal-ceramic restorations may be repaired with composite in some cases to postpone the fabrication of a new restoration. Knowledge about the bond strength can help predict the success rate of this treatment modality. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of two types of mechanical surface treatment of metal along with the use of different adhesive systems on bond strength of composite to a non-precious metal alloy.
In this in vitro experimental study, 110 metal discs were fabricated of nickel chromium alloy and were randomly divided into two groups of surface preparation with sandblasting (S) and bur (B). In each group, the samples were divided into five subgroups based on the adhesive system and composite resin used: Group NC: Z350 composite without application of adhesive; group AC: Alloy primer/Clearfil AP-X; group ZA: Z-Prime Plus/Aelite; group MT: Monobond Plus/Tetric N Ceram; group AZ: Adper Single Bond Plus/Z250. In the positive control group (PC), metal discs were covered with feldspathic porcelain. All samples were then subjected to 1000 thermal cycles and shear bond strength was measured. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (P The interaction effect of type of surface treatment and type of adhesive system on bond strength was significant (P Type of surface preparation and adhesive affect the bond strength. Surface preparation by sandblasting or bur combined with the use of Adper Single Bond Plus and also combination of Z-Prime Plus adhesive and sandblasting yielded the highest bond strength value.