Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,952 studies31 sourcesUpdated 57 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NCThe journal of advanced prosthodontics

Effect of cement space, resin cement type, and surface treatment on the bond strength of monolithic zirconia copings to Ti-base abutments.

  1. 1Private Dental Clinic, Kocaeli, Turkey.
  2. 2Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey.

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this study is to investigate the influence of cement space, surface treatment and resin cement type on the bond strength between monolithic zirconia copings and Ti-base abutments.Materials and methods

Eighty Ti-base abutments were connected to analogs, embedded in acrylic resin and specimens were prepared. Monolithic zirconia copings with cement spaces of 50 µm and 110 µm were fabricated using CAD-CAM. All zirconia bonding surfaces were sandblasted with 50 µm Al₂O₃. The specimens were allocated to 8 groups (n = 10) according to Ti-base abutments surface treatment (primer only/airborne-particle abrasion+primer) and resin cement type (Multilink Hybrid Abutment/G-CEM LinkForce). Following cementation, specimens were subjected to 10,000 thermocycles and tensile testing. The resulting data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests (P < .05).Results

Mean tensile force values differed significantly among groups (P < .05). The highest mean bond strength was observed in Group 5 (535.93 ± 71.42 N), and the lowest in Group 4 (207.31 ± 40.57 N). Airborne-particle abrasion groups (Groups 5 - 8) showed significantly higher tensile force values than the other groups (P < .05).Conclusion

The bond between Ti-base abutment and monolithic zirconia depends on multiple factors. In the current study, the higher bond strength obtained in the groups containing Ti-base abutments sandblasted with 50 µm Al₂O₃ indicates that surface roughening may play an effective role in improving bonding performance. However, the lack of significant differences in cement space and resin cement composition among the sandblasted specimens suggests that the effects of these parameters may be more limited than that of surface treatment.

Related

  1. Biaxial Flexural Strength and Fracture Behavior of Five-Unit Monolithic Zirconia Fixed Dental Prostheses: An Experimental and Finite Element Study
    Theresa Schwab, Jamila Yassine, Robert Nicic +3
    Journal of functional biomaterialsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEurope PMC
  2. Influence of surface-conditioning strategies on the shear bond strength of veneering ceramic to aged and non-aged zirconia frameworks fabricated with milling and 3D-printing.
    Selin Çakır, Özay Önöral
    The journal of advanced prosthodonticsPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textEurope PMCPMC
  3. Surface morphology, printing accuracy and flexural strength of 3D-printed zirconia posts with longitudinal microgrooves.
    Pingting Lin, Qi Jiang, Lu Yin
    BMC oral healthPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textEurope PMCPMC
  4. Internal fit of cobalt-chromium and zirconia implant abutments fabricated using different techniques: a micro-computed tomography study.
    Pedro Molinero-Mourelle, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Rocio Cascos-Sanchez +4
    International journal of implant dentistryPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCDOAJ
  5. Zirconia abutments and reduced crown-to-implant ratios: Insights into stress distribution.
    Lorenzo Grassi, Ayrton Geroncio Silva, Guilherme Almeida Borges +5
    Brazilian oral researchPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEurope PMC
BibTeX
@article{bayramov2026effect,
  title = {{Effect of cement space, resin cement type, and surface treatment on the bond strength of monolithic zirconia copings to Ti-base abutments.}},
  author = {Natig Bayramov and Gönül Merve Eyüboğlu-Ateş and Ayşe Koçak-Büyükdere},
  journal = {The journal of advanced prosthodontics},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.4047/jap.2026.18.5.472},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42948546},
  note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Effect of cement space, resin cement type, and surface treatment on the bond strength of monolithic zirconia copings to Ti-base abutments.
AU  - Natig Bayramov
AU  - Gönül Merve Eyüboğlu-Ateş
AU  - Ayşe Koçak-Büyükdere
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/13
JO  - The journal of advanced prosthodontics
DO  - 10.4047/jap.2026.18.5.472
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42948546
AB  - Purpose  The objective of this study is to investigate the influence of cement space, surface treatment and resin cement type on the bond strength between monolithic zirconia copings and Ti-base abutments.Materials and methods  Eighty Ti-base abutments were connected to analogs, embedded in acrylic resin and specimens were prepared. Monolithic zirconia copings with cement spaces of 50 µm and 110 µm were fabricated using CAD-CAM. All zirconia bonding surfaces were sandblasted with 50 µm Al₂O₃. The specimens were allocated to 8 groups (n = 10) according to Ti-base abutments surface treatment (primer only/airborne-particle abrasion+primer) and resin cement type (Multilink Hybrid Abutment/G-CEM LinkForce). Following cementation, specimens were subjected to 10,000 thermocycles and tensile testing. The resulting data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests (P < .05).Results  Mean tensile force values differed significantly among groups (P < .05). The highest mean bond strength was observed in Group 5 (535.93 ± 71.42 N), and the lowest in Group 4 (207.31 ± 40.57 N). Airborne-particle abrasion groups (Groups 5 - 8) showed significantly higher tensile force values than the other groups (P < .05).Conclusion  The bond between Ti-base abutment and monolithic zirconia depends on multiple factors. In the current study, the higher bond strength obtained in the groups containing Ti-base abutments sandblasted with 50 µm Al₂O₃ indicates that surface roughening may play an effective role in improving bonding performance. However, the lack of significant differences in cement space and resin cement composition among the sandblasted specimens suggests that the effects of these parameters may be more limited than that of surface treatment.
SN  - 2005-7806
SN  - 2005-7814
ER  -