Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of different adhesives and veneering resins on the shear bond strength (SBS) of polyetheretherketone (PEEK).
METHODS: A total of 138 PEEK specimens were randomly divided into 6 groups according to adhesive material application: Control (C, no application), Adhese Universal (A) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), Gluma Bond Universal (G) (Heraeus Kulzer, South Bend, IN, USA), G-PremioBOND (P) (GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Single Bond Universal (S) (3M, Saint Paul, MN, USA) and visio.link (V) (Bredent, Senden, Germany). Each adhesive group was divided into two subgroups according to the type of veneering material: Estenia direct composite (D) and Gradia Plus indirect composite (IN) (both GC Corporation). After the veneering process, the specimens were aged by thermal cycling. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for SBS analysis (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: The highest SBS results were obtained in the VIN group, followed by the VD, PD, GIN, AIN, AD, SIN, SD, PIN, GD, CIN and CD groups, respectively (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in terms of the type of veneering composite when the same adhesive was applied (P > 0.05), except for Gluma Bond Universal (P = 0.009). All the adhesives tested showed clinically acceptable SBS results.
CONCLUSIONS: Visio.link offered the highest adhesion to PEEK, whereas the tested universal adhesives may be used as an alternative to visio.link in clinical settings. It was determined that changing the veneer type has no statistical difference when the same adhesive material is used.
METHODS: A total of 138 PEEK specimens were randomly divided into 6 groups according to adhesive material application: Control (C, no application), Adhese Universal (A) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), Gluma Bond Universal (G) (Heraeus Kulzer, South Bend, IN, USA), G-PremioBOND (P) (GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Single Bond Universal (S) (3M, Saint Paul, MN, USA) and visio.link (V) (Bredent, Senden, Germany). Each adhesive group was divided into two subgroups according to the type of veneering material: Estenia direct composite (D) and Gradia Plus indirect composite (IN) (both GC Corporation). After the veneering process, the specimens were aged by thermal cycling. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for SBS analysis (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: The highest SBS results were obtained in the VIN group, followed by the VD, PD, GIN, AIN, AD, SIN, SD, PIN, GD, CIN and CD groups, respectively (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in terms of the type of veneering composite when the same adhesive was applied (P > 0.05), except for Gluma Bond Universal (P = 0.009). All the adhesives tested showed clinically acceptable SBS results.
CONCLUSIONS: Visio.link offered the highest adhesion to PEEK, whereas the tested universal adhesives may be used as an alternative to visio.link in clinical settings. It was determined that changing the veneer type has no statistical difference when the same adhesive material is used.
摘要：
目的：评估不同粘合剂和贴面树脂对聚醚醚酮（PEEK）剪切粘结强度（SBS）的影响。
方法：将共138个PEEK标本根据粘合剂材料的应用随机分为6组：对照组（C，无申请)，AdheseUniversal（A）（IvoclarVivadent，Schaan,列支敦士登),GlumaBondUniversal（G）（HeraeusKulzer，南弯,IN,美国),G-PremioBOND（P）（GC公司，东京,Japan),单键通用(S)(3M，圣保罗,MN,美国）和Visio。链接(V)(Bredent,Senden,德国)。根据贴面材料的类型，每个粘合剂组分为两个亚组：Estenia直接复合材料（D）和GradiaPlus间接复合材料（IN）（均为GCCorporation）。在贴面过程之后，样品通过热循环进行老化。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Mann-WhitneyU检验进行SBS分析(P<0.05)。
结果：在VIN组中获得最高的SBS结果，其次是VD，PD,GIN,AIN,AD,SIN,SD,PIN,GD,CIN和CD组，分别(P=0.001)。当使用相同的粘合剂时，贴面复合材料的类型没有显着差异（P>0.05），除GlumaBondUniversal外（P=0.009）。所有测试的粘合剂显示临床上可接受的SBS结果。
结论：Visio。链节对PEEK的附着力最高，而测试的通用粘合剂可以用作Visio的替代品。临床环境中的链接。确定当使用相同的粘合剂材料时,改变单板类型没有统计学差异。
方法：将共138个PEEK标本根据粘合剂材料的应用随机分为6组：对照组（C，无申请)，AdheseUniversal（A）（IvoclarVivadent，Schaan,列支敦士登),GlumaBondUniversal（G）（HeraeusKulzer，南弯,IN,美国),G-PremioBOND（P）（GC公司，东京,Japan),单键通用(S)(3M，圣保罗,MN,美国）和Visio。链接(V)(Bredent,Senden,德国)。根据贴面材料的类型，每个粘合剂组分为两个亚组：Estenia直接复合材料（D）和GradiaPlus间接复合材料（IN）（均为GCCorporation）。在贴面过程之后，样品通过热循环进行老化。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Mann-WhitneyU检验进行SBS分析(P<0.05)。
结果：在VIN组中获得最高的SBS结果，其次是VD，PD,GIN,AIN,AD,SIN,SD,PIN,GD,CIN和CD组，分别(P=0.001)。当使用相同的粘合剂时，贴面复合材料的类型没有显着差异（P>0.05），除GlumaBondUniversal外（P=0.009）。所有测试的粘合剂显示临床上可接受的SBS结果。
结论：Visio。链节对PEEK的附着力最高，而测试的通用粘合剂可以用作Visio的替代品。临床环境中的链接。确定当使用相同的粘合剂材料时,改变单板类型没有统计学差异。
