Bond strength of resin composite to glass-based, oxide, and polymer-infiltrated ceramics after different surface pretreatment methods: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

  • Philipp Kanzow
  • , Clemens Lechte
  • , Annette Wiegand
  • , Simone Grandini
  • , Giulia Malvicini
  • , Crystal Marruganti
  • , Nairn H.F. Wilson
  • , Christopher D. Lynch
  • , Igor R. Blum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective: To assess the impact of different surface pretreatment protocols on the repair bond strength of resin composite to different ceramics. Study selection: Laboratory studies reporting (micro-)tensile bond strength of resin composite to full contour/monolithic ceramics following different surface pretreatment methods. Sources: Electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via Ovid, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched in October 2024. Data: A total of 32 sources reporting on 31 studies were entered in frequentist network meta-analyses (glass-based ceramics: 21 studies, polymer-infiltrated ceramics: 11 studies, oxide ceramics: two studies). Various surface pretreatment methods for glass-based and polymer-infiltrated ceramics were compared to the application of an adhesive only (control group), and P-scores were used to rank their efficacy. For glass-based ceramics, highest bond strengths were achieved following hydrofluoric acid etching + silane (multi-)primer + adhesive (+24.37 MPa, 95 %-CI: 13.18-35.56; P-score: 0.92) followed by silica coating + silane (multi-)primer + adhesive (+20.58 MPa, 95 %-CI: 8.25-32.92; P-score: 0.74). Regarding polymer-infiltrated ceramics, diamond bur roughening + silane (multi-)primer + adhesive (+13.15 MPa, 95 %-CI: 4.97-21.33; P-score: 0.86), silica coating + silane (multi-)primer + adhesive (+11.52 MPa, 95 %-CI: 1.64-21.39; P-score: 0.78), and hydrofluoric acid etching + silane (multi-)primer + adhesive (+11.36 MPa, 95 %-CI: 3.38-19.33, P-score: 0.78) were most effective. On oxide ceramics, no surface pretreatment increased bond strength compared to the application of a silane (multi-)primer and an adhesive. Conclusions: Different surface pretreatment protocols are required for different types of ceramic substrates to achieve optimal bond strength to resin composite. Clinical significance: Depending on the type of ceramic substrate the appropriate pretreatment method must be employed to optimise the repair bond strength between ceramic and resin composite.

Original languageEnglish
Article number106051
JournalJournal of Dentistry
Volume162
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2025

Keywords

  • Minimally-invasive dentistry
  • Operative dentistry
  • Repair
  • TBS
  • Tensile bond strength
  • µTBS

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Bond strength of resin composite to glass-based, oxide, and polymer-infiltrated ceramics after different surface pretreatment methods: Systematic review and network meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this