Restorative Dentistry

A brief history and current status of metal-and ceramic

surface-conditioning concepts for resin bonding in dentistry
Mutlu Özcan, DDS*/Peter Pfeiffer, Prof Dr**/Ibrahitn Nergiz, Dr***

The bond strength of resin to metal or ceramic .\urfaces has been increased with the introduction of vari-
ous surface-conditioning techniques. The principles of currently used conditioning methods and clinical
trials with these methods are summarized. The advances in surface-conditioning methods have increased
bonding to a high level: however, interpretation of the literature review itidicates that chemical honding
by means of recently introduced techniques provides better results than does mechanical bonding.
(Quintessence Int 1998:29:713-724)

Key words: ceramic surface conditioning, metal surface conditioning, resin bonding

Clinical relevance
Chemical bonding appears to give better results in
different clinical applications, such as resin veneers,
resin-bonded prostheses, and veneered clasps, than
do other conditioning methods.
A lthough satisfactory bonding between porcelain
and metal is achieved with current dental practices,
during the last decade many attempts have been made
to create and develop techniques for bonding composite
materials and dental metals. This has led to the develop-
ment of various surface-condition ing techniques.
With the advent of adhesive dentistry, competition in
developing techniques and adhesive materials with in-
creased bonding strength has emerged between dental
scientists and manufacturers. Therefore, the intent of
this article is to review the published literature on the
advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly
used surtace-conditioning concepts, concentrating on
their brief history and their applications with different
dental materials, as well as to provide an overview of
clinical results obtained.
* Research Assistant, Deparlment of Prosthodonlics. School of Oral
and Demal Medicine. University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
'^Professor, Department of Prosthodontics. School of Oral and Denial
Medicine, University of Cologtic, Cologne, Germany.
'»'Assistant Professor, Department oí Prosthoiionlics, School of Oral
and Dental Medicine, university of Coiogne, Cologne, Germany,
Reprint requests: Prof Dr P. Pfeiffer, Department of Prosthodontics.
School of Oral and Dentai Medicine, Utiiversily of Cologne, Kerpener
Strasse 32. 50931 Coiogne, Germany, E-maii: peter.pfei ffer@uni-koeln.de
Surface-conditioning methods
Mechanical bonding
In 1989, Hansson' reported that in clinical practice,
either a direct or an indirect technique could be used for
the construction of resin-bonded prostheses. The direct
technique was first described in 1973, by both Ibsen-'
and Portnoy,-' as a simple method in which an acrylic
resin denture tooth or the patient's own tooth was
bonded, using a resin composite material, to the etched
enamel of the abutment tooth without metal
reinforcement. In the same year, Rochette-'^ presented an
alternative method, an indirect technique, in which a
perforated cast-metal splint was bonded to the enamel
with poly(methyl methacrylate) resin. On the basis of
these investigations, mechanical bonding gained
importance.
Macromechanical bonding
Macromechanical bonding is one of the oldest methods
used to retain metal restorations, allowing the cement to
lock into the metal. This method involved a perforated
design, which had the disadvantage of exposing the
resin to saliva, causing piaque retention, and subjecting
the resin to wear and crack propagation.*" The simple,
old technique of using mechanical beads had the main
disadvantage that considerable thickness was added to
the restoration. The network retainer system, first intro-
dticed by Shen' in 1984, was composed of prefabricated
mesh casting patterns to provide undercuts in the re-
tainer surface. This also had the disadvantage of requir-
ing considerable metal thickness.

Quintessence International 713

Öican et ai
From available information, it is clear that mechani-
cal retention has the following disadvantages : unreliable
bonding values, gap formation, and microleakage result-
ing from differences in thermal coefficients of expan-
sion, Furtbermore, mechanical retention requires a
thickness of materials that might result in overcontour-
ing of the restoration, which is inconsistent with the
conservative approach.*
Micromechanical bonding
Mi crome chani cal bonding systems involveii sandblast-
ing, which improved the retention between the metal and
resin by cleaning oxides or any greasy materials from
metal surfaces. Sandblasting created very fine roughness
and ihus increased the bonding surface area, enhancing
mechanical and chemical bonding between some resins
and metals.* However, bond strengths obtained from
sandblasting were insufficient. Long-term durable bond-
ing was obtained with resin composites (Panavia Ex,
Ktiraray) that contained phosphate monomer,
¡Electrochemical etching
Electroetched retainers were developed in 1982 by
Lividitis and Thompson^ at the University of Maryland,
Fine irregularities in the surface of base alloys were
formed to increase the bond strength, ehminating resin
exposure. Furthermore, metal could be made thinner to
avoid overcontouring and massive tooth reduction.
Electrolytic etching is the most widely used procedure to
create increased mechanical retention to metal surfaces,
but only some nickel-chromium and cobait-chrotnium
alloys have been successfully etched,''*'Electrochemical
etching has tbe di.sadvantages of difficulty in creating
a properly etched surface and not working well witb pre-
cious alloys. It is also technique sensitive, requires
expensive equipment, and is time consuming.
Electrochemical etching of the metal framework cer-
tainly improves the longevity of tesin-bonded restora-
tions; however, to circumvent its limitations, numerous
alternatives have been proposed in recent years.
Electrolytic tin plating
Most debondings in resin-bunded prostheses resuit from
failure at the resin-metal interface,"-'^ It was therefore
necessary to improve the retention between the resin lut-
ing cement and the metal sutface of the prosthesis. The
tin-plating technique consists of coating the rnetal sur-
face electrolytically, at 6 V, with a thin layer of tin oxide.
The layer is placed on the freshly sandblasted metal sur-
face, which acts as the cathode, with a felt-tipped anode
714
moistened with a solution of opaque resin and tin. The
surface is then oxidized and air dried, A second coating
of tin is applied at 9 V, and the sttrface is oxidized,
washed with water, and dried, A special opaque resin is
then applied before the resin veneer is built up.
Electrolytic tin plating is required particularly for
precious metal alloys because only base metal alloys
can be etched,'•• Other studies noted that tin oxides form
crystals on the surface of the alloy, making it easy for
the resin to penetrate and produce micromechanical
and chemical retention,'^"'
Chemical etching
The use of an acid-based gel is an alternative to etching
the alloy retainer electrolytically. This alternative was
originated by Lividitis" in 1986, Although new chetni-
cal-etching systems have been claimed to provide better
retention than either electrolytic etching or perforated
prostheses when used with some metals,'* these chemi-
cal etchants produce a shallower etching pattem than is
found on electrolytically etched metal.'' This technique
has the advantage of being very simple to use chaiiside;
furthermore, the restoration can be re-etched in case of
failure, without the need for sophisticated laboratory
procedures.
Chemical bonding
SR Spectra Link. SR Spectra Link (Ivoclar) creates a
physicochemical bond between the resin and the metal
without silane coating (Table 1), The adhesive resin is a
light-cured bonding medium based on metliacrylic acid,
which has a metal-active, a resin-active, and a water-
repellent component. Because SR Spectra Link contains
a fluorinated alkyl methacryiate, it greatly reduces the
susceptibility of the bonding system to hydrolysis,
Tbe metal-active part of Spectra Link reacts with
metal oxides and thus provides tbe necessary conditiotts
for an optimum bond. The Spectra Activator prepares
the polymerized surface of the Spectra Link for chemi-
cal bonding with tbe specially developed light-curing
Spectra Opaquer, Polymerization takes place in the
Spectramat iu 5 minutes. This is followed by the appli-
cation of the resin-activator component. Spectra
Activator, The framework is coated with Spectra
Opaquer and polymerized twice to make sure that all
the surfaces are irradiated. The surface treatment is
completed by tbe use of tbe desired Spectrasit color.
This method can also be used to provide a high-quality
bond between the metal and denture base material,
Silicoater Classical. Silicoater (Heraeus-Kulzer) was
developed at Jena University by Tiller et al-" in 1984
Voiume 29, Number 11, 1998
{Table 2), The method was initially developed for bond-
ing veneer resins to metal. Mechanical retention, such
as beads or wires, was not required, aud tnicroleakage
between the veneer and metal was eliminated. The pro-
cedure originates from the need for an intermediate
layer containing silicon dioxide (SiO^), because this
provides sufficient bonding of the resin via a silane
bonding agent that does not ahsorb water.
The surfaces of precious alloys are sandblasted first
with 25O-(tm aluminum oxide for 15 seconds at 0,4
MPa, The sandblasted surfaces are coated with Siliclean
solution (Heraeus-Kulzer), After washing, the metal is
dried for 2 minutes at room temperature in air. This tech-
nique consists of heating SiO^ with a flame (Siliflam,
Heraeus-Kul/er) in a specially designed apparatus. The
flame should be adjusted to provide enough deposition
of SiO^ molecules on the metal surface, Siliflam is ap-
plied for 5 minutes (air-propane ratio of 20:1; air, ap-
proximately l.iO L/h, propane, 6,5 L/h), After the speci-
men is dried for 4 minutes in air, a silane layer (a
mixture of Silicoup A and B, Heraeus-Kulzer) is applied.
Silica coating leads to initial bond strengths 25%
higher than those to etched metal-' and can be used to
bond either composite or acrylic resin to any metal
surface.
The technique has the disadvantage of being expen-
sive, and the internal resin interface caunot be altered
during try-in,' The other shortcomings of the system are
the nneven distribution of the flame over the restoration
aod chemically unstable silica layers. Assuming a usual
delay of 2 to 7 days between laboratory fabrication and
clinical cementation, this layer requires protection dur-
ing transportation. This problem can be overcome by
coating the inner surface of the retainers with a thick
layer of opaque base paste or a bonding agent (without
its catalyst) from a resin composite luting cement,
Silicoater MD. The Siiicoater MD (metai-dotted)
(Heraeus-Kulzer) is the new version of the 14-year-old
Silicoater Classical technique. The new technique
requires a special oven tbat burns a chrome-endowing
silica layer onto the surface (Table 3), The difference
between the techniques is that in the new method the
metal surface is coated with SiO^ as a liquid and is
fired at highly controlled and carefully regulated
temperatures.
The surfaces of precious alloys are sandblasted first
with 250-|jm aluminum oxide for 15 seconds at 0,4
MPa. The sandblasted surfaces are coated with Siliclean
solution. After it is washed, the metal should air dry for
2 minutes at room temperature. Finally, the surface is
treated with Sililink (Heraeus-Kulzer) and positioned in
the Silicoater MD oven, and the Sililink is activated for
8 minutes. The framework is then allowed to cool for 5
Quintessence Internationai
minutes at room temperature. Following this, the surface
is conditioned with Siliseal (Heraeus-Kulzer) bonding
agent and dried at room temperature for 4 minutes.
This system has the advantage of avoiding flame-
adjustment problems, ie, eiiminating the human factor.
The principle of this technique is based ou a property of
chromium, whieh forms waterproof bonds with sili-
cates. These bonds are obtained as a result of the com-
plicated chemistry of chromium bonding at tempera-
tures higher than 250"C, Similar waterproof bonds can
also be formed with certain alloy components, such as
copper, other metals, and their oxides,----''
Kevloc AC. Kevloc AC (Heraeus-Kulzer) is a rela-
tively new system, introduced in 1995, that offers a com-
bination of chemieiti and mechanical bonding. It has
presented promising results in resin veneer alloy bond-
ing, inlays, onlays, and implant-supported restorations
as well as removable prostheses (Table 4},'^
The Kevloc method was designed to bond resin lay-
ers to the surface of dental alloys. The temperature
needed for the activation of the bonding layers is gener-
ated by contact heat transfer and heat radiation in the
activation chamber of tbe Kevloc AC apparatus.
In this system, the surfaces of the alloys are sand-
blasted with fresh llO-pm aluminum oxide at 0,2 MPa.
The sandhlasted surface is cleaned with a clean bmsh,
and the loose particles are removed. Kevloc-Primer
(Heraeus-Kulzer) is applied with a clean brush in one
direction and dried at room temperature for 1 to 2 min-
utes. Then, Kevloc Bond (Heraeus-Kulzer) is applied
with a brush. After it is dry, the framework is placed in
the chamber of Kevloc AC, to be activated for 8 min-
utes. Then the specimen is cooled at room temperature
for 5 minutes. The specimen is then positioned in the
activating chamber. After the metal has cooled, which
takes about 4 minutes, Dentacolor Opaquer (Heraeus-
Kulzer) or Artglass Opaquer (Heraeus-Kulzer) is applied
in thin layers and polymerized for 90 seconds in the
Dentacolor XS (Heraeus-Kulzer),
Siloc. The surfaces are first sandhlasted with 250-
pm aluminum oxide and dried with water-free and oil-
free air at 0,3 MPa (Tahle 5), Siloc-Pre (Heraeus-
Kulzer) is applied with a brush and dried at room
temperature for 2 minutes. The specimen is placed in
the Siloc apparatus (Heraeus-Kulzer), and program 2 is
selected. Later, the framework is cooled at room tem-
perature for 4 minutes. The activated surface is coated
with Siloc-Bond (Heraeus-Kulzer) and dried in the air
for 5 minutes. Following this, Dentacolor Opaquer is
applied and light polymerized in the Dentacolor XS
unit for 90 seconds.
Rocaiec. The Rocatec system (BSPE) introduced in
1989, presented a new kind of acrylic resin-metal bond-
715
Ozean et al

TABLE 1 SR Spectra Link process TABLE 2 Silicoater Classica! process

t Application ot Solvent evaporated after 30 seconds 1, Sandbiasting Aiuminum oxide, 250 [jm;
retention beads pressure: > 0.4 MPa:
2 Sandbiasting Aluminum oxide, 50 to 250 |jm. time: approximately 15 seconds
steam cleaning, drying with oil-tree 1. Hinsing Silioiean: Air drying
compressed air 3. Mounting Positioning in the Silicoater apparatus
3 Coating Spectra Link: Polymerization in 4. Conditioning Silitlam' Approximately 5 minutes;
Spectramat for 5 minutes tiame proportion ol air-propane 20:1
4 Surface activation Spectra Activator (air application 130 L7h;
(resin-reactive component) propane 6.5 L/h for approximateiy
5 Coating Spectra Opaquer: Polymerization 4 minutes; cooling down in air)
in Spectramat and coating witfi 5. Siianization Silicoup A and B: Drying for
Spectrasit Cclor apprcximateiy 4 minutes
6. Coating Dentaooior Opaquer; 90-second
poiymerizatioo in Dentaooior XS
apparatus

TABLE 3 Silicoater IVID process TABLE 4 Kevloc AC process

1. Sandblasting Aluminum oxide, 250 |jm; 1. Sandblasting Aluminum oxide, 110 [jm.
pressure: 2 0.4 MPa; pressure: 0.2 MPa
time: approximately 15 seconds 2. Coating Kevloo-Primer; Appiied and dried
2. Rinsing Siliclean; Ait drying for 1 to 2 minutes
3. Conditioning Brushing a thin iayer ot Sililink; 3. Aotivation Kevloc Bond in Kevloc AC for
sample positioning in the middle of 8 minutes; cooling down tor 5 minutes
the apparatus; 2 minutes of cooiing 4. Polymerization Dentacoior Opaquer or Artglass
down in thin layers, in Dentacolcr XS
4. Siianization Coating with Siliseal; for 90 seconds
drying for 2 minutes
5. Coating Dentacolor Opaquer; Polymerization
in Dentaooior XS for 90 seconds

TABLE 5 Süoc process TABLE 6 Rocatec process

1. Sandblasting Aiuminum oxide, 250 pm; 1. Sandblasting Rcoatec Pre in Rocatector;

drying with oil-free air at 0.3 MPa pressure; 0.25 MPa
2. Conditioning Siloc; Applied and dried for 2 minutes 2. Conditioning Rocatec Plus in Rocatector;
3. Activation In Siloc apparatus: cooling down pressure; 0 25 MPa;
fcr 4 minutes distance: 1 cm trom the surface; _
4. Bonding Siloc-Bond: Applied and dried for time; approximately 13 sec/cm' a
5 minutes 3. Siianization ESPE-Sil; Drying time, 5 minutes ^
5. Poiymerization Dentacoior Opaquer: Poiymerization 4. Coating VisioGem or Slnfcny Opaquer
in the iight unit Dentacoior XS for
90 seconds

ing system (Table 6). The principle is a tribochemical
application of a silica layer by means of sandblasting.
First, surface conditioning takes place in the Rocatector
Delta (ESPE) with Rocatec Pre, llO-pm aluminum
oxide (ESPE), at a pressure of 0.25 MPa. Then the sam-
ples are blasted with 1 lO-pm aluminum oxide modified
with silicic acid, Rocatec Plus (ESPE), in the
Rocatector Delta at 0.25 MPa at a distance uf 1 cm from
the metal surface for 13 sec/cm-.
The theoretic calculated speed of the Rocatec Plus
particles hitting the alloy surface is 200 m/s, producing
spot heating up to !,000°C. This spot heating, together
with the hlasting pressure, results in the embedding of
silica particles on the metal surface, rendering the metal
surface chemically more reactive to resin via silane.
ESPE-Sil silane agent (ESPE) is applied before the sur-
face is coated with the opaquer and dried at room tem-
perature for 5 minutes.
The particular advantages of the process are the
bpeed and accuracy of coating, the fact that the adhesive
layer can be checked visually, and the fact that thermal
stressing of the framework is avoided. This is especially
useful in repairs hecause remaining acrylic resin does
not have to be removed."

716 Volume 29, Number 11, 1998

 Care should be taken to sandhlast the metal surface
at an angle of 90 degrees and not to touch the treated
surface during any steps of the preparation. The Rocatec
system uses the mechanical energy of silica-covered
aluminutn grains as these are hlasted onto the metal sur-
face. The silane coupling agent adheres to the surface
when the mechanical energy is transformed to thermal
energy, providing a chemical hond between the silica
layer and the resin cement. Gugg en berger-'' deñned the
Rocatec procedure as a novel acrylic resin-metal bond-
ing system and concluded that shear/compression and
tensile tests revealed bonding strength values obtained
with the Rocatec system to be greater than those
obtained with mechanical bead retention, even after
thennocycling and storage in water for 1 year.
Adhesive chemical bonding
Recently, chemical adhesive systems have become very
popular in bonding resin to metal. The greatest advan-
tage of these systems is that they are very easy to apply
and do not require laboratory processes. Sandblasting
renders the metal surface fresh and clean of any metal
oxides or any greasy materials and makes the surface
chemically more reactive to resin by increasing the
metal surface, Bxamples of these adhesive systems are
Panavia Ex and Panavia 21 adhesive resin cements
(Knraray). In both laboratory and clinical research,
Panavia Ex is one of the most popular metal adhesive
cements. Bonding to the sandblasted nonprecious alloys
is highly satisfactory with good physical properties.*
Comparison of conditioning systems
Metal conditioning
Numerous studies over the years have assessed the sur-
face conditioning of alloy surfaces. Crcugers et aV were
among the pioneers of such studies. They compared the
bond strength of silica coating in combination with
MicroponI (Kulzer), sandblasting with Panavia Ex, elec-
troplating with Panavia Ex, and etching in combination
with Clearfil to nickel-chromium and cob alt-chromium
alloys. The mean tensile bond strengths of silica-coated
and sandblasted specimens were significantly higher
than those of both electrolytically tin-plated specimens
and etched specimens. There was an overall effect of
luetal alloy on the bond strength but no significant dif-
ferences between both alloy types for etched specimens.
In a subsequent study, Luthy et al" investigated fac-
tors influencing metal-resin bond strength to filled com-
posites. Apparently, bond strength was greater to silica-
coated metal than to sandblasted and electroetched
Quintessence International
specimens. In a similar study, statistically significant
differences in bond strengths were observed between
precious and nonprecious alloys. It was observed that
silica coating produced higher shear bond strengths than
either electroetching or chemical etching.-" On the other
hand, the bond strength created by the Rocatee system,
independent of the alloy used, proved the reliability of
chemical bonding over sandblasting alone and treatment
with silane.-^
Caeg et aP^ and Ishijima et aP" demonstrated that the
silica treatment process always provided better results
than that of electroetching in palladium-, cobalt-
chromium-, and nickel-chromium-based alloys.
In the last decade, a number of studies were focused
on comparison of Silicoater Classical, Silicoater MD,
and Rocatec systems. Silicoater MD provided a notably
lower degree of bond strength to nonprecious alloys,
whereas Silicoater Classical and Rocatec systems
showed superior bonding to all types of alloys, espe-
cially to pure titanium.^'"" It has been possible to create
a chemical bond resembling the metalloceramic bond
between dental alloys and resin composites. Ruyter et
al'-' attributed a 17% to 47% reduction in bond strength
in two palladium and three gold-based alloys coated
with silica to water diffusion through the interfacial
layer; the moisture attacked the SiO layer between the
metal and the composite. The process of sandblasting
makes the surface rough, which is essential for building
up and locking in the silica oxides; this could explain
the differences in the bonding values among various
alloys. This study was one of the first explaining the
importance of the silica-coating mechanism.
The effect of water storage on bonds obtained with
Silicoater Classical, Silicoater MD, Rocatec system,
and Panavia Ex to different types of alloys was ad-
dressed by Beldner et al,^^ who concluded that the bond
strength developed with both the Rocatec system and
Panavia Ex to cobalt-chromium alloys remained the
same, without significant change. The values related to
Silicoater MD dropped by a value of 30%, while those
obtained with the Silicoater Classical system increased
slightly from the results obtained before water soaking.
When nickel-chromium-beryllium alloys were
treated with silica and then silanated (Silicoater MD
and Rocatec), cohesive failure of the opaqtiers between
the composite veneering materials and the porcelain
fusing alloys was ohserved in both experimental
groups.^^ The analysis of pre sandblasting, which is rec-
ommended as pretreatment to thermal silica coating or
as part of a tribochemical silica-coating process, and
the influence of particle size on the loss of substance
revealed that volume loss, surface morphology, and
compositional changes are greater in noble alloys
717
Ö2can et al
(gold-silver-copper) than in base alloys (nickel-
chromium and cobalt-chromium); however, these dif-
ferences did not seem to be critical for the fit of the
restorations.-" Embedded alumina particles were also
found in all alloys after sandblasting, and alumina con-
tent was increased by 14 to 37 wt% as measured by en-
ergy-dispersive K-ray spectroscopy. Also following tri-
bochemical silica coating, a layer of small silica
particles remained on the surface, increasing the silica
content to between 12 and 20 wt%."
However, in another study,"* slightly higher loss of
substance was observed with palladium alloys, and par-
ticle sizes smaller than 30 p m caused dust production
and obstruction of the nozzle during sandblasting.
Therefore, it was recommended that the thin metal mar-
gins be blasted only with silicated corundum with a par-
ticle size of 30 |im before bonding. Unnecessary sand-
blasting of the restorations should be avoided because it
is likely to damage the margins of the restorations.
The bond strengths of two adhesives (Microfill pon-
tic, Kulzer; Nimetic-grip. ESPE) and two metal pre-
treatment methods (Silicoater MD and Rocatec) were
assessed by Stark and Holste"' for bonded fixed partial
dentures. The test procedure was carried out in accor-
dance with German Industrial Standards (DIN 532S3;
DIN 8200), which ensure high reproducibility in sand-
blasting and bonding pairs of metallic specimens.
Although few differences were detected between the
adhesives, the Rocatec method showed significantly
lower strength values than Silicoater MD.
The same outcome was reported in a comparative
study of the bonding of high-gold and nonprecious alloy
treated with these systems and adapted with Microfill
pontic to the enamel of extracted human teeth. The two
methods of veneering increased the composite strength
and the nonprecious alloy yielded the highest values for
shear strength. The shear resistance of the Silicoater MD
system was found to be higher than that of the Rocatec
system.'* The results of these two studies contradicted
the findings of previous studies. Nevertheless, both
methods can be used for bonded fixed partial dentures
because the bond strengths they provide are adequate.
In summary, studies related to surface conditioning
with current methods revealed that silica coating of the
alloy is an important advance in adhesive bonding of
resin composites to metal because it reduces the impor-
tance of the alloy composition and its oxide formation
to the bonding mechanism.
Ceramic conditioning
A new glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic (In-Ceram, Vita
Zahnfabrik) has shown greater ñexural strength than
718
other ceramic or glass materials. Because of its high
strength, this ceramic has been suggested as a core ma-
terial for resin-bonded fixed partial den tu re s,"*"-^' This
clinical application requires a stable resin bond to the
ceramic and is advantageous for other clinical applica-
tions, such as inlays or artificial crowns. Etching silica-
based ceramics with hydrofluoric acid or ammonium bi-
fluoride creates a sufficient resin bond that is enhanced
with a silane coating of the etched ceramics. However,
neither etching with these solutions, nor adding silane,
resulted in an adequate resin bond to the alumina-based
In-Ceram ceramic.'"—'"
Although In-Ceram ceramic can be etched with boil-
ing sulfuric acid, all of the etched samples were found
to have debonded after 150 days of storage in isotonic
artificial saliva solution because of a weakened bond to
the superficial alumina particles as a result of etch-
¡i^g .16,49 Therefore, the development of alternative meth-
ods of bonding to In-Ceram was needed. In following
studies, it was noted that the use of resin composites
that contained phosphate monomer, in combination with
sandblasting or silica coating, increased the bond
strength to In-Ceram.-"*"^''"-'"
After sandblasting or silica coating of In-Ceram, the
tensile bond strength of the modified bis-GMA resin
Panavia Ex {Kuraray) showed no significant changes
within the first 30 days, but there was a pronounced
decrease after 150 days of storage and thermocyciing.
Silica coating In-Ceram with the Roeatec system resulted
in a better bond strength to the conventional resin. Micro-
fill pontic. than did use of .silane only.''^ In vitro shear
strength of the resin bond was found to be higher to
glass-infiltrated aluminum oxide ceramic material treated
with Sihcoater or Rocatec systems than to nonprecious
metal alloys. With this method, the small marginal gap
and film thickness of the luting cement was decreased.^'
Most notably. Kern et ai," using alignment appara-
tus, bonded resin composite filled in Plexiglas tubes to
disk-shaped metal, core ceramic, glass-ceramic, and
enamel .specimens. Specimen surfaces were conditioned
cither by sandblasting and etching or the Silicoater MD
procedure. After storage, statistically significant differ-
ences were recorded in bond strength between the test
materials. The group treated with Silicoater MD gave
the best bonding results at the end of 150 days" water
storage and thermal cycling.
Gobel et al'' studied the effect of surfaee conditioning
on different dental ceramic materials—glass ceramics
(Bioverit, Schott; Vita-Miirk2, Vita Zahnfabrik; Cerec,
Vita Zahnfabrik), sintered ceramics (Vita Omega, Vita
Zahnfabrik), and aluminum oxide ceramics (In-
Ceram)—in shear bond strength tests of the ceramic-
cotnposite bond. Among the conditioning methods, silica
Volume 29, Number 11, 1998

coating with Silicoater Classical, Silicoater MD, aud
Rocatec, as well as Siloc, Kevloc, and Spectra Link, pro-
vided better results tban did sandblasting, grinding, or
etching with phosphoric acid. Wben glass-infiltrated,
cyhndrical alumina ceramic In-Ceram specimens were
bonded to phosphoric acid-etched human enamel, the
results of the shear tests indicated that durable bond be-
tween enamel and In-Ceram was more likely to be ob-
laiued witb Rocatec than with Silicoater MD or
Panavia.-"
Mode affaiiure
Altemative adhesive methods for bonding to In-Ceram
exhibited different bond failure modes in scanning elec-
tron microscopic studies,^-" The reason for the adhesive
failure and low bonding in tbe presence of loose silica
panicles on the silica-coated alloy surface was studied.^'
It was suggested that ultrasonic cleaning instead of sim-
ple bench tapping, as recommended by the manufac-
turer, should be performed to increase the bond strength.
Scanning electron microscopy and chemical analysis
demonstrated adhesive failure patterns on tbe treated
surface. With the Rocatec tribochemical silica-coating
system, failures occurred witbin the silica layer itself.
When thermal silica coating witb Silicoater MD was
used, only cobesive failures within the resin layer were
found. On tbe otber band, sandblasting showed different
failure modes,^'
Effect of water storage and tbermocycling
on bond strength
Several authors conducted research concentrated on the
effect of water storage and thermocycling to simulate
the aggressive oral environment under laboratory condi-
tions-' and found no significant differences between
fresh silica-coated nonprecious alloys and those stored
in water at 37''C for I week, except for sandblasted
specimens bonded witb Panavia Ex, where bonding val-
ues were increased, A sbort-term storage study was per-
formed by Laufer et al," and tbey concluded that ce-
mentation significantly increased the bond strength for
both etched and silica-coated specimens after 30 min-
utes to 3 days of water immersion. An increase in bond
strength of silica-coated, nickel-chromium alloy speci-
mens after 30 days of water immersion was reported by
Guggenberger,^^ No statistically significant decline was
found in the adhesive strength of the Rocatec system
from baseline to long term; tbe initial bonding results
were obtained after 20 hours of water storage at 36''C
plus 6 hours of thermocycling, repeated 180 times be-
tween 15°C and 70°C, and long-term values were calcu-
Qtjintessence iniernationai
Ozean et al
lated after 1 year of water storage and 900 repetitions of
thermocycling between I5''C and 70°C,
Another study in the arena of water storage, by
Peutzfeldt et al,-" found that immersing the samples in
boiling water for 55 minutes and then storing them at
22°C for 5 minutes, repeated four times before tensile
bond testing, did not change the bond strength values of
silica-coated Wirobond alloy (cobalt-chromium)
(Bego), whereas it did cause a statistically significant
decline in the bond strength of gold-based and palla-
dium-based alloys. Testing of nonsilicated specimens
also resulted in significantly lower bond strengths. This
decrease was related to the difference,'; in coefficient of
expansions, which pre.sumably sped up the diffusion of
water between tbe resin cetnent and the metal,
Pfeiffer" studied the bond strength of Panavia Ex
and Orthomite (J, Morita) to nickel-chromium and
pal I ad iurn-silver alloys after 3 days aud 150 days of
water storage at 37°C. He noted that tbe initially high
bond strength values of nonprecious alloys bonded
with Panavia Ex remained unchanged. The palladium-
silver alloys, in contrast, had initial bonding values
lower than those of the other alloys, and tbese values
were further reduced by 33% after 150 days' water
storage.
Kern et aF^ compared five different resin bonding
systems to cobalt-chromium alloys, Tbese were stored
in artificial saliva for 150 days at 37°C and every sec-
ond day were subjected to 1,000 thermocycles in a tem-
perature range of 5°C to 55°C for a total of 75,000 cy-
cles. Specimens were tested after 24 bours, 10 days. 30
days, 90 days, and 150 days. The results indicated that
in contrast to the micromechanical bonding systems,
mechanical-chemical ones (Rocatec system) showed no
significant change in the tensile bond strength during
this observation period. The ,system was recommended
as suitable for cobalt-chromium alloy used in resin-
bonded restorations,
Tbe effect of short-, medium-, and long-term water
storage and thermocycling on the bonding durability
and failure bebavior of Rocatec and Silicoater systems
used witb gold-silver- and palladium-silver-based al-
loys was studied, Silicoater produced better results
after 20 hours of water storage. Three hundred sixty
thermal cycles between 15''C and 70°C for 12 weeks
resulted in a significant drop of the bond strength and
an adhesive mode of failure and without significant
change in adhesive failure after storage of the samples.
On the otber hand, 1,080 thermal cycles for 22 weeks
reduced the bond value between 38% and 69% in the
group treated with Silicoater, which exhibited adhe-
sive failure. They attributed this drop in bond values to
the effects of thermocycling. which facilitated water
719
attack of the SiO^-composite bonding. The Rocatec
system recorded the lowest drop in bond values, rang-
ing from 8% to 15%,"
Ishijima et aP" evaluated the effect of I week of
water storage, 500 cycles, and 1,500 thermai cycles on
the hond strength produced with the Silicoater system,
Panavia Ex, and Superbond used with different precious
and nonprecious alloys. They found that increasing the
thermal stress led to the diminution of the bond
strengths of all systems.
Smith et al" compared bond strength and durability
of the Silicoating, electroetching, and Panavia Ex sys-
tems bonded to nickel-chromium alloy. After short-
term (2,672 cycles) and long-term (10,584 cyeles) ex-
posure, silica aud silane-treated specimens
demonstrated the greatest decrease in bond strength
(39%), whether it was under aqueous or thermocycled
conditions. The second highest value was obtained
from electroetched specimens, while Panavia Ex speci-
mens had the least decrease in bond strength. The
Silicoating technique resulted in a significant reduction
in hond strength with respect to time with or without
thermocycling, which could indicate that there is a high
initial attachment of resin to metal but that this effect
may deteriorate over time in a water environment. The
bond quality achieved with Rocatec, Silicoater MD,
and SR Spectra Link systems and different types of
precious and nonprecious alloys was tested after the
specimens were subjected to 10,000 thermocycles. The
results demonstrated that the Silicoater MD system
produced the lowest bond values to the nonprecious al-
loys, while the Rocatec system achieved superior bond
strength to all types of alloys,^"
The bond strength of Panavia Ex. Cover up (Parkell),
and silica-coated stainless steel and the effect of ther-
mocycling on the bond values were evaluated in another
study, Panavia Ex and Cover up produced bond
strengths superior to that produced by the Silicoater sys-
tem. Interestingly, thermocycling was found to have no
signiflcant effect on the hond values,^^
In a similar study, the effect of storage conditions (24
hours of water storage and 1,000 thermocycles) on the
hond strength of eight different bonding systems, in-
cluding Rocatec. Panavia Ex and Silicoater, to a nickel-
chromium alloy was tested, Thermocycliug was found
to have no effect on the Rocatec system but resulted in a
decreased bond strength for Panavia Ex and Silieoater
MD; the reduced values were close to the critical clini-
cal values,**"
More recently, it was found that the retention of
resin to cobalt-chromium and titanium alloys treated
with the Rocatec system was not affected by immersion
of the samples in boiling water for 25 minutes, while
720
the bond was decreased in the case of gold alloys,^'*
Pfeiffer^^i reported that regardless of the resin type, the
Silicoater MD system produced high initial bond
strengths, which deteriorated after thermoeycling and
long-term water storage. The Rocaiec system, in com-
bination with Nimetie-grip, provided lower but clini-
cally acceptable, stable bonding even after thermocy-
cling and water storage.
When tensile bond strength was tested, the tribo-
chemical silica-coating procedure with Rocatec was
found to be suitable for cobait-chromium alloys in
resin-bonded restorations after 18,750 thermocycles,^^
Hansson and Moberg''' evaluated three different meth-
ods of increasing the bond strength of resin to metal.
The original Silicoater technique, Silicoater MD, and
the Rocatec systems were tested. The results proved
that with each system, the retention of resin to the gold
specimens decreased after thermocycling but retention
to the coba h-chromium alloy and titanium was not af-
fected. The original Silicoater technique produced
higher hond strengths than its new version, Silicoater
MD,
Clinical studies
Resin veneers
Musil and Hàselbarth,''" after applying the Silicoater
technique for resin veneers, carried out a follow-up
study from 1984 to 1988 on 13,133 Den taco lor-coated
prosthetic applications. They ob.served only a 2,7% inci-
dence of fracture failure,
WÖstman'^^ observed fracture failures of the facings
in 54 patients with 157 veneers (Silicoater/Dentacolor).
Between the period of 6 and 18 months, in the silica-
coated group, fractures were found in only 4 of 157 ve-
neers ohserved, Bruhn et al"'' earned out a 3-year fol-
low-up study comparing the Silicoater/Dentacolor
technique to other methods in 304 crowns. Surface con-
ditioning with Silicoater gave clinically acceptable re-
sults esthetically, although there were some small color
differences that could be attributed to insufficient poly-
merization. Over this period of time, a defect rate of 4%
was observed,
Heidi'*' followed up on 4,893 crowns (Silicoater/
Dentacolor), observing a fracture rate of 2,3% for gold-
based alloys, van der Veen^** compared the Silicoater
system clinically and experimentally with other systems
and, after thermocycling, obtained the highest bond val-
ues with the Silicoater system. Clinically he evaluated
40 flxed partial dentures. At the end of 2 years, 10%
debonding was observed. The importance of a thin opa-
quer layer was also emphasized,^^
Volume 29, Number 11, 1998
Resin-bonded prostheses
Kerschhaum'''' evaluated 1,453 resin-honded prostheses
and found die probability of dehonding to he 75% less
with the Silicoater system, 65% less with acid-etching,
and 15% less with net technique than with sandhlasting
over 4 years. The results suggested that resin-bonded
prostheses can successfully survive if meticulous atten-
tion is given to the procedures outlined. The survival of
posterior resin-honded prostheses was achieved follow-
ing a common protocol.'"
A meta-analysis of posterior resin-bonded fixed par-
tial dentures treated with electrolytic etching and
Clearfil F2 (Covex); sandblasting with 50-nm alu-
minum oxide, and Panavia Ex: and silicate coating and
Microfill pontic was carried out after 2.5 years," The
results of this clinical trial revealed that silicate coating
was the most suitable of the tested adhesive systems.
After complete polymerization, Panavia Ex was also
found to be acceptable in combination with cobalt-
chromium, nickel-chromium, Wiron 77 (Bego), or
Wiron 99 (Bego). A combination of silica coating and
Clearfil F2 was thought to he an interesting alternative
for clitiical use.
Verzijden et al'- evaluated 201 posterior resin-
honded tlxed partial dentures and found no significant
dilïerences among Clearfil with etching, Panavia Ex
with sandblasting, and Microfill pontic C with silicate
coating or among the different preparation forms.
Three years of clinical experience in 47 patients with
120 resin-honded restorations placed after Rocatec
application demonstrated few failures.^' Of the 13
failures, 11 fractured between the metal and the VisioGem
(ESPE) opaque layer. The other two small fractures were
observed at the acrylic resin and were difficult to see. The
rest of the restorations U"eated with Rocatec exhibited no
color changes and were resistant to abrasion.
Boening" evaluated 46 resin-honded prostheses for
45 months. The metal surfaces were tribochemically
coated with silica, and the abutments were etched wilh
35% phosphoric acid for 60 seconds. Ten failures resuit-
itig from bond failures and porcelain fractures were ob-
served. Humidity control was also stressed as a very im-
portant factor for long-term success in resin-bonded
prostheses.
Veneered clasps
Despite its unesthetic appearance, resin coating report-
edly made partial denture clasps look better. Schott'^
reported that, as a result of silica coating, long-term
bonding of the composite and the metal was possible
without the use of retention pearls and undercuts. U.se
Quintessence International
of Dentacoior opaquer following SiO^ conditioning
with Silicoater and siianization imparted tooth color to
the partial denture clasps.
In some studies, the Rocatec/Visiogem system has
been used for veneering clasps, which has the advantage
of having no thermal or mechanical effect on the denture
and opaquer, instead bonding the metal surface through
the kinetic energy of Rocatec Plus.'"" However, the liter-
ature reviews in these studies revealed no long-term clin-
ical results, although t!ie esthetic advantages are obvious.
Discussion
Cuncnt research efforts in modern surface conditioning
have been reviewed in this article. A iiumher of tech-
niques that mechanically facilitate alloy-resin honding
for adhesive prosthodontics have heen discussed.
Although clinical studies proved the weakest link to
be hetween the resin and the metal, resin-bonded pros-
theses have shown that Panavia Ex, which is an adhe-
sive his-GMA resin composite, also exhibits very pre-
dictahle results.'- Tin plating is a surface treatment
recommended for improving the strength and durability
of the bond between adhesive resins and the metal. With
electrochemical etching, on the other hand, it is difficuh
to create a properly etched surface, and the technique
does not work well with precious alloys. The method is
also technique sensitive, requires expensive equipment,
and is time consuming.
A frequently mentioned criticism of etching non-
precious alloys is the complexity and technique sensi-
tivity of the treatment. In this regard, Sihcoater is also
complex and technique sensitive.
Rocatec treatment is simpler than tin plating. Roca-
tec was developed to pemiit chemical honding hetween
resin veneers and the metal framework in fixed partial
dentures, hut the simplicity of the technique makes it a
potentially useful surface treatment in adhesive prosth-
odontics. Rocatec, Silicoater. and tin plating surely im-
prove bond strength compared to sandblasting.
The influence of prolonged thermal cycling and
water storage seems to affect the hond strength of resin
to alloy that has heen treated with trihochemical and
thermal silica-coating procedures. Important variables,
such as storage media, thermocychng, or medical fa-
tigue, are likely to affect the hond strength of the com-
binations tested and will ultimately influence the devel-
opment of more reliable systems in the future. Although
the interim clinical results are encouraging, only long-
term clinical studies will determine whether chemical
adhesion to metal surfaces resists not only masticatory
forces but also diffusion of water and temperature varia-
tions in the oral cavity.
721
Ozean et al
According to their manufacturers, most of the new
chemical bonding systems require sandblasting of the
metals prior to honding to achieve a high bond
strength. Sandblasting the restorations has the potential
to remove significant amounts of material and could af-
fect the cUnical adaptation of the prosthesis. Thus, the
material loss resulting from these procedures is impor-
tant to the clinical fit of restorations. Therefore, knowl-
edge of the surface characteristics of different alloys
after these surface treatments is needed to improve the
understanding of the bonding mechanism and the fail-
ure modes involved.
Sandblasting with alumina not only resulted in
micromechanical roughening of the surface but also left
alumina particles embedded in the surface. The role of
this alumina in honding for these systems is not known.
Unfortunately, there are no data available to indicate
whether the adhesive failures reported appear within, at,
or outside the silica layer, which necessitates further
research. The encouraging results obtained from the
application of silica coating indicate that it could be
tried in other types of porcelain.
In light of the previous disadvantages of mechanical
retention, it was necessary to develop an alternative
gap-free system that consistently chemically bonds
resin to any metal and allows the use of a large variety
of metal alloys. Panavia Ex and Panavia 21 have demon-
strated good bond results in many studies, whereas the
bond strengths oh tai ne d from sandblasting and bonding
with conventional bis-GMA adhesive are poor.
Recent advances in surface-conditioning methods
have increased bond strength values greatly; however,
the interpretation of the literature review indicates the
necessity to focus more on an understanding of why
hond values achieved with the Silicoater and Rocatec
systems are different or similar, because the mecha-
nisms of these methods are not the same.
Summary
Data examined in this review indicated that chemical
surface conditioning by silica coating with the newly in-
troduced methods gives better results than the mechan-
ical retention used in current clinical practice. It is ap-
parent that further research is necessary and that the
bonding of resin-bonded prostheses should continue to
be investigated both in vivo and in vitro utilizing the
latest surface-conditioning methods.
References
1. Hansson O. The Silicoater technique for resin-bonded prostheies:
Clinical and lahoratoiy procedures. Quintessence [nt 1989;20:85-99.
722
2. Ibsen RL. One-appointment technique using an adhesive compos-
ite. Dent Surv 1973 ;49:30-32.
3. Ibsen RL. Fixed prastheties with a natural crown pontic using an
adhesive eomposite. J South Calif Dent Assoc 1973;41;10i)-102.
4. Portnoy LL. Constructing it composite pontie in a single visit.
Dent Surv l973;49:2Q-23.
5. Roebette AL, Attachment of a splint lo enamel of lower anterior
teetb. I Prosthet Dent 1973;3O;4I8^23.
6. Metal resin bonding. Adept Report l991;2:29-36.
7. Shen G. Resin bonded bridge bond strength using a cast mesh
technique [abstract 464]. J Dent Res 1984;2:221.
8. Lividitis GJ, Thompson VP Etched castings; An improved reten-
tive mechanism for resin-bonded retainers. J Prosthet Dent 1982;
47:52-58.
9. Thompson VP, Lividitis GJ, Del CE. Resin bond to eleetrolyti-
cally etched nonprecious alloys for resin bonded prostheses.
J Prosthet Dent 1981;(special issue);337.
10. Thompson VP, Pfeiffer P. Das elektrolytische Anätzen einer
Ni-Cr-Legiening. Disch Zahnärztl Z I986;4I ;82i)-83L
11. Marinello C, Lütby H. Scbarer P. Silicoater erhöht Verbund-
festigkeit in der Adhäsivprothetik. Dent Labor 1990;38:
1625-1629.
12. van der Veen JH. Resin-bonded bridges in vitro and in vivo [the-
sis]. Groningen, Tbe Netherlands: University of Groningen, 1988.
13. Rammeisberg P, Pospieeh P, Cernet W. Clinical factors affecting
adhesive fixed partial dentures: A 6-ycar study. J Prosthet Dent
I993;7O;3UO-3O7.
14. Zjdan O. Etched base metal alloys. Comparison of relief pattern,
bond strength and fracture modes. Dent Mater \9S5;¡:
209-213.
15. van der Veen JH, Krayenbtink JG, Bronsdijik AE, van de Poel
ACM. Resin bonding of tin-electroplated precious metal fixed
partial dentures; One year clinical results. Quintessence Int
1986;171:299-301.
16. van der Veen JH, Jongebloed WL, Dijk F. SEM study of six
retention systems for resin to six differently treated metal sur-
faces. Dent Mater 1988;4;272-277.
17. Lividitis GJ. A chemical etching system for creating micro-
mechanical retention in resin-bonded retainers. J Prosthet Dent
1986;5ö;181-188.
18. Sedbeny D, Burgress J, Schwar?. Evaluation of chemical etching
systems for a base metal alloy [abstract 723]. J Dent Res
1989;68;272.
19. Aquillino SA, Diaz AAM. Tensile bond strength of eleetroly-
tically and chemically etcbed base metals [abstract 551]. J Dent
Res 19S9;68;250.
20. Tiller HJ, Musil R, Magnus E, Garschke A, Goble T, Loekowandt
P Der Sandstrahlprozess und seine Einwirkung auf den
Oberilächenzustand von Dentallegieruagen II. Quintessenz
1985;36:2151-2I58.
21. Re GJ, Kaiser DA, Malone WEP, Garcia GF Shear bond strength
and scanning electron microscope evaluation ot three different re-
tentive methods for resin-bonded retainers. J Prosthet Dent
l988;59;568-573.
22. Luthy H. Marinello CP, Schäfer P. Factors influencing metal resin
tensile bond strength to filled composite [abstract 884]. J Dent
Res I988;67:223.
23. Laufer EZ, Nicholis JIJ, Towsend D. SiO coating: A composite to
metal bonding mechanism, J Prosthet Dent 198S;3;320-327.
24. niler HJ, Gobel R, Magnus B, MusU R, Bimberg R, Werkstoff-
kundliche Grundlagen lum Silicoater-MD Verfahren. Dent
Labor l990:38;78-82.
Volume 29, Number 11, 1998

25. Nergiz t, Pfeiffer R Niedenneier W. Effects of surface ireatment
on resin veneer/altoy bond strength [abstract 2390]. J Dent Res
t997;76:312.
26. Guggenbcrger R. Das Rocatec-System-Haftung durch tribo-
chemische Beschichtting. Dtsch Zahnürztl Z 1989:44:874-87ñ.
27. Creugers NHJ, Welle PR, Vrijhoef MMA. Four bonding systetns
for resin-retained cast metal prostheses. Denl Mater I988;4:
85-88.
28. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Silicoating. Evaluation of a new
method of bonding composite resin to metal. Scand J Denl Res
1988;96:171-176.
29. Caeg C, Leinfelder KF, Lacetleld WR, Bell W. Effectiveness of a
method in bonding resins to metáis. J Pro^thet Dent i99Q;
64:37-41.
30. Ishijinia T, Captito AA, Mito R. Adhesiotl of resin to casting
alloys. J Prostbet Dent 1992:67:445^149.
31. Wirz J, Schmidii F, Mignaval A. Neue Kunststoff-Metall-
Verbundsysteme und ihre legierungsabbängige Haftqualitäl.
Quintessenz 1996,47:1231-1240.
32. Hansson O. Strengtb of bond witb Conipspan opaque to three
silicoated alloys and titanium. Scand J Dent Res 1990:98:
248-256.
33. May KB, Fox J, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. Silane to enhance tbe
bond between polymethyl methacrylate and titanium. J Prosthet
Dent 1995:73:428-431.
34. Ruyler IE, Warrli ML, Hero H. Adhäsionmechanism des Kunst-
stoff-Metall-Verbundes hergestellt mit dem Silicoaler-Verfahren.
¡n: Hofmann M (ed). Siiicoater-Symposiiim: Klinische
Erfahrungen und experimentelle Ergebnisse. Heidelberg: Hüthig
1990:133-141.
35. Beldner W, Marx R. Silikatisieren als Oberflächenkondition-
ierung von Metallen für den hydrolysebeständigen Verbund mit
Kunststoffen. Quinteîsenz 1992:43:103-115.
36. Wietboff B, Ratzke T. Stender E Vergleichende Untersuchung
zur Verbundfestigkeit bochgoidhaltiger und edelmetalifreier
Legierungen bei unterschiedlichen Konditionierung für die
Adhäsivbrückentechnik. Zahnärztl Welt 1994:4:235-237.
37. Kem M. Thompsoti VP Sandblasting and silica-coating of dental
alloys: Volume loss, morphology and cbanges in tbe surface
composition. Dent Mater 1993:9:1.')5-16I.
38. Pfeiffer P. Haftung von Kunststoff an Legierungen abhängig von
der Korngrösse bet tribocbemischer Bescbichtung. Dtîch
Zahnärztl Z 1993:48:692-695.
39. Stark H. Holste T. Untersuchungen zur Verbundfestigkeit silika-
tisiertcr Mctalloberfliäcben. Dtsch Zahnarzll Z I992;47:
624-626.
40. Kern M, Thompson VP Bonding to glasí infiltrated alumina
ceramic: Adhesive methods and their durabiiity. J Prostbet Dent
1995:73:240-249.
41. Claus H. Vita In-Ceram, ein neues Verfabren zur Herstellung
oxid-keramiscber Gerüste für Kronen und Brücken. Quintessenz
Zabntech l990;16:35-46.
42. Pfeiffer P, Schwickerath H, Sommer MC. Festigheit dentalkera-
mischer Massen. Zahnär^tl Weit i99t: 100:938-942.
43. Geis-Gerstorfer J, Kantantra P Zum Einfluss der Prüfmethode
auf die Biegcfestigheit von IPS-Empress und In-Ceram. Dtsch
Zabnärztl Z I992;47:618-62I.
44. Giordano R, Pelletier L, Campbell S, Pober S. Flexural strength
of infused ceramic, glass ceramic, and feldspathic porcelain. J
Prostbet Dent 1995:73:4i i-418.
45. Kern M, Knode H, Strub JR. The aII-porcelain, resin-bonded
bridge. Quintessence tnt t99l;22:257-2ö2.
Quintessence International
özcan et al
4ñ. Kern M. Neikes MJ, Strub JR. Haftfestigkeit deí Klebever-
bundes auf In-Ceram nach unterschiediicher Oberflächen-
konditioniertnig. Dtsch Zahnärzil Z 1991:46:758-761.
47, Pape FW, Pfeiffer P, Marx R. Haftfestigheit von geätzlem In-
Ceram an Schmelz. Zahnarzt! Weil 1991 ;IÜ0:450-453.
48. Kravixien-Vongphantuset R, Pietrobon N. Nalhanson D. Bond
strength of resin cement to Iii-Ceram core material |ab.stract
533]. J Dent Res 1992:71.
49, Fiscber J, Schmid M, Kappen HF, Strub JR. Gefügeausbildung
der dentaikeramischen Kernmasse In-Ceram und thermische
Dehnung ihrer Einzelkomponenten. Disch Zabnärztl Z 1991;
46:461-463.
50. Neikes MJ, Kem M, Strub JR. Tensile bond strength of two siii-
coating (silicate/silanization) systems on the Al,O,-ceramic In-
Ceram [abstract 144). J Dent Res 1992:71:533.
51. Pröbster L Untersuchung zur Scherfestigkeit des In-Ceram-
Kunstîtoff-Verbundes. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1992:47:292-294.
52. Kem M, Thompson VP. Eine einfache Versuchsanordnung ¿ur uni-
versellen Prüfung des Klebeverbundes im axialen Zugtest. Dtsch
Zatinärztl Z i993;48:769-772.
53. Göbel R, Welker D, Musil R. Keramikkondition ierung fur Einglie-
derung und Reparatur. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1994;49:629-631.
5i. Kem M, Thompson VP. Sandbiasting and silica coating of a glass
inñltrated alumina ceramic: Volume loss, morphology, and cbanges
in tbe surface composition. J Prosthet Dent 1994:71:
453^61.
55. Pfeiffer P. Spezifische adhärente Klebung abgestrahlter
Legierungsoberflächen. Dtsdi Zahnärztl A 1989;44:936-937.
56. Meiners H, Herrmann R, Spitzbarth S. Zur Verbundfestigkeit des
Rocatec .-Systems. Dent Labor 1990:38:185-188.
57. Smith RM. Barret MG, Gardner WA, Marshall T, McLean MJ,
McMichael DW, et al. Effect of environmental stress and surface
treatment on resin to metal bonding. Am J Dent 1993;4:111-115.
58. Wiri J, Müller W, Schmidii F. Neue Verfahren fur den Kunststoff-
Melai Verbund. Eine vergleichende in-vitro Studie. Schweiz
Monatsschr Zahnmed 1992:102:13-19.
59 Bahannan S, Lacefieid WR. An evaluation of three methods of
bonding resin composite to stainiess sleel. tnt J Prosthodont
1993;8:502-5Ü5.
60. Chang I, Powers JM, Hart D. Bond strength of composite to alioy
treated with bonding .systems. J Prosthodont 1993:2:110-114.
¿i Pfeiffer P. Spezifische adhärente Klebung abge.îtrahiter
Legiemngsoberflächen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1989:44:936-937.
62. Schmid M, Fischer J, Hoffmann Ch, Strub JR. Chemische und
thermische Kompatibilität voll keramischer Verbundsysteme. Dtsch
Zahnärztl Z 1990:45:505-508.
63. Hansson O, Moberg L. Evaluation of three silicoating methods for
resin-bonded prosthesis. Scan JDentRes l993;10t:243-25i.
64. Musil R. Häselbarth M. Anliegen, Organization and Ergebnisse
einer 10-Jahres-Studie zur klinischen Bewährung des Silicoater-
Verfahrens am Ende des 5. Jahres, tn: Hofmann M (ed). Siiicoater-
Symposium: Klinische Erfahrungen und experimentelie
Ergebnisse. Heidelberg: Hüthig, i990:3-9.
65. Wöstman B. Das Siiicoater-Verfabren im Vergleicb mit ber-
kömmlichen Verblenmethoden-Ergebnisse eines Recallprogramms.
In: Hofmann (ed). Silicoater-Symposium' Klinische Erfahrungen
und experimente lie Ergebnisse. Heideiberg: Hüthig, 1990:10-17.
Bruhn L, Buchholz G, Curth K. 3-Jahres-Studie zur klinischen
ö^.
Bewertung des Silicoater-Dentacoior-Verfahren.s im Vergleich zu
anderen Verbiendsystemen. In: Hofmann (ed). Siiicoater-
Symposium: Kiinische Erfahrungen und experimenteiie
Ergebnisse. Heidelberg: HUthig, i990:l8-25.
723
Ozean et ai

67, Heidi K, Klinische Etfahiuiigen de,í Silicoter-Vetfülirciis bei der 72, Verzijden C. Creugers NHJ, Mulder J, A mu Iti-practice clinical
Atiwendung protetisclier Therapiemittel aus edemetall-freien study of posterior resin-bonded bridges. A 2,5-year interim
Legierungen, In: Hofmaiiii (ed), Silicoaler-Symposium: report. J Dent Res l994;73:529-535,
Klitiisciie Erfahrungen und experimentelle Ergebnisse, 73, Mayer K, Drei Jahre klinische Erfahrung mil dem Rocatec-
Heidelberg: Hülhig, 1990:44-48, Vcrbundsystem, Dent Lubor I994;42:1787-1790,
68, Van der Veen JH, Klinischer und expei'imenteller Vergleich des 74, BoEning KW. Clinicai performance of re s in-bonded fixed partial
Silicoater-Verfahrens tnit anderen Verbundsystemen, In: dentures, J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:39-44,
Hofmann (ed), Silicoater-Symposium: Klinische Erfahrungen 75, Scliott HJ. Zahnfarbene Verblendung von Modellgussklammem,
und expetitnentelle Ergebnisse, Heidelberg: Hüthig. 1990: Quintessenz Zahntech I989;l5:n33-1136.
128-132,
76, Wichmann M. Die verblendete Modellgussklammer. Dtsch
69, Kerschhauni T, Das Silicoter-Verführeti- Daten aus dem Adhasiv- Zahnarztl Z l990;45:77t)-772
brückenregister, in: Hofmann (ed), Silicüater-Symposium:
77, Vietor K, Freesmeyer WB, Die kunsts toff verblendete Model-
Klinische Erfahrungen und experimentelle Ergebnisse.
gussklammer-Ergebnisse einer In-vivo-Studie, Quintessenz
Heidelberg: Hiithig, l'i90:6ÇI-74,
l992;43:1935-¡943.
70, Kellet M, Verdijden CWGJM, Smith GA, Creugers NHJ. A
multicentered clinical study on posterior resin-bonded bridges'
Tbe Maiicbester trial, J Dent t994;22:208-212,
71, Verzijden C, Creugers NHJ, Van't Hof MAA. Meta-analysis of
two different trial.s on posterior resin-bonded bridges, J Dent
1994;22:29-32,

mimm • Answers to Ql 8/98 Questions =

^ i»r^^ 1. D 5. B 9, D 13. C
2. A 6, D 10. B 14. D
3. D 7, C 11. A 15. D
4. A 8, D 12, B 16. A

724 Voiume 29, Number 11