Journal articles on the topic 'Glass-matrix composites, bioactive glasses, metal matrix composites'

When metals are modified by second-phase particles or fibers, metal matrix composites (MMCs) are formed. In general, for a given metallic matrix, reinforcements differing in their chemical nature and particle size/morphology can be suitable while providing different levels of strengthening. This article focuses on MMCs reinforced with metallic glasses and amorphous alloys, which are considered as alternatives to ceramic reinforcements. Early works on metallic glass (amorphous alloy)-reinforced MMCs were conducted in 1982–2005. In the following years, a large number of composites have been obtained and tested. Metallic glass (amorphous alloy)-reinforced MMCs have been obtained with matrices of Al and its alloys, Mg and its alloys, Ti alloys, W, Cu and its alloys, Ni, and Fe. Research has been extended to new compositions, new design approaches and fabrication methods, the chemical interaction of the metallic glass with the metal matrix, the influence of the reaction products on the properties of the composites, strengthening mechanisms, and the functional properties of the composites. These aspects are covered in the present review. Problems to be tackled in future research on metallic glass (amorphous alloy)-reinforced MMCs are also identified.

Bulk metallic glasses (BMGs) are amorphous alloys that exhibit unique mechanical properties such as high strength due to their liquid-like structure in the vitreous solid state. While they usually exhibit low ductility, they can be toughened by incorporating secondary phase particles within the amorphous matrix via composite fabrication to generate amorphous metal matrix composites (MMCs). Traditional MMCs are fabricated at high temperature in the liquid state with tedious blending processes. This high temperature processing route often leads to unwanted reactions at the reinforcement/matrix interface, creating brittle intermetallic by-products and damaging the reinforcement. In the present work, novel bulk metallic glass composites (BMGCs) were fabricated at low processing temperatures via thermoplastic forming (TPF) above the glass transition temperature of the amorphous matrix. Here, the unique thermophysical features of the matrix material allow for TPF of composites in non-sacrificial moulds incorporating various types of reinforcement, via processing in the solid state at low temperatures (less than 200 °C), within a short timeframe (less than 10 minutes); this avoids the formation of brittle phases at the reinforcement/matrix interface leading to efficient bonding between particles and matrix, thereby creating a tough, low density composite material.

Understanding the degradation of a composite material is crucial for tailoring its properties based on the foreseen application. In this study, poly-L,DL-lactide 70/30 (PLA70) was compounded with silicate or phosphate bioactive glass (Si-BaG and P-BaG, respectively). The composite processing was carried out without excessive thermal degradation of the polymer and resulted in porous composites with lower mechanical properties than PLA70. The loss in mechanical properties was associated with glass content rather than the glass composition. The degradation of the composites was studied for 40 weeks in Tris buffer solution Adding Si-BaG to PLA70 accelerated the polymer degradation in vitro more than adding P-BaG, despite the higher reactivity of the P-BaG. All the composites exhibited a decrease in mechanical properties and increased hydrophilicity during hydrolysis compared to the PLA70. Both glasses dissolved through the polymer matrix with a linear, predictable release rate of ions. Most of the P-BaG had dissolved before 20 weeks in vitro, while there was still Si-BaG left after 40 weeks. This study introduces new polymer/bioactive glass composites with tailorable mechanical properties and ion release for bone regeneration and fixation applications.

Hydroxyapatite and bioactive glass particles were added to pure magnesium and an AZ91 magnesium alloy and then consolidated into disc-shaped samples at room temperature using high-pressure torsion (HPT). The bioactive particles appeared well-dispersed in the metal matrix after multiple turns of HPT. Full consolidation was attained using pure magnesium, but the center of the AZ91 disc failed to fully consolidate even after 50 turns. The magnesium-hydroxyapatite composite displayed an ultimate tensile strength above 150 MPa, high cell viability, and a decreasing rate of corrosion during immersion in Hank’s solution. The composites produced with bioactive glass particles exhibited the formation of calcium phosphate after 2 h of immersion in Hank’s solution and there was rapid corrosion in these materials.

During the last years, several studies proved the high potential of metallic glasses to be used as reinforcements in lightweight alloys. Thereby, focus was mostly on particle reinforced composites or three-dimensional and omnidirectional glass arrays within the composite. Using a specific layered structure of the entire ribbons as reinforcement to design direction-dependent tailored properties is a novel approach. The composites in this study were produced by gas pressure infiltration of a layered stack of metallic glass ribbons. Ribbons of the metallic glass Ni60Nb20Ta20 were used as reinforcements and aluminum alloy AlSi12 as matrix. Mechanical tests like four point bending and tensile tests as well as elastic analysis using ultrasound phase spectroscopy (UPS) were performed to classify composite’s properties. Further, micro computed tomography (µCT) analysis and metallographic investigations were carried out on the four point bending samples after testing to reveal occurring damage mechanisms.

Nanocomposites involving iron particles in silica glass matrix have been synthesized by the hot pressing of suitably reduced precursor gel powders. The metal particles have diameters in the range 3.8 to 10.2 nm. An almost four orders of magnitude resistivity range at room temperature has been obtained by such changes in particle diameters. The resistivity in the temperature range 200-340 K shows a fractional temperature dependence with an average value of n ∼ 0.69. The resistivity changes in this temperature region can be explained on the basis of an electron tunneling mechanism.

Bioactive glasses (BGs) are currently employed in a wide range of medical and dentistry applications by virtue of their bone-bonding ability. The incorporation of BGs into a collagen matrix may be used to combine the regenerative potential of these materials with the specific biological advantages of collagen. However, most of the collagen/BG composites reported in the literature are scaffolds and there is a lack of moldable putties or injectable systems. Here, granules of an innovative BG containing strontium and magnesium were mixed with collagen and PEG to obtain a putty (BGMS/C) suitable for dental applications. For the sake of comparison, granules of 45S5 Bioglass®, the gold standard among BGs, were used to prepare a 45S5/collagen putty. Both the composites were evaluated in vitro with respect to murine fibroblasts. The materials showed an excellent biocompatibility, making them interesting for possible applications in dentistry and reconstructive surgery. Moreover, BGMS/C seems to stimulate cell proliferation.

Passive commercial gauzes were turned into interactive wound dressings by impregnating them with a chitosan suspension. To further improve healing, and cell adhesion and proliferation, chitosan/bioactive glass wound dressings were produced with the addition of (i) 45S5, (ii) a Sr- and Mg-containing bioactive glass, and (iii) a Zn-containing bioactive glass to the chitosan suspension. SEM and FTIR analyses evidenced positive results in terms of incorporation of bioactive glass particles. Bioactivity was investigated by soaking chitosan-based bioactive glass wound dressings in simulated body fluid (SBF). Cell viability, proliferation, and morphology were investigated using NIH 3T3 (mouse embryonic fibroblast) cells by neutral red (NR) uptake and MTT assays. Furthermore, the wound-healing rate was evaluated by means of the scratch test, using NIH 3T3. The results showed that bioactive glass particles enhance cell adhesion and proliferation, and wound healing compared to pure chitosan. Therefore, chitosan-based bioactive glass wound dressings combine the properties of the organic matrix with the specific biological characteristics of bioactive glasses to achieve chitosan composites suitable for healing devices.

Recently, porous polymer-ceramic composites have been developed and represent promising scaffolds to be used as synthetic extracellular matrix in bone tissue engineering since they combine the advantages of these two types of materials. On the other hand bioactive glasses (BG) have been used as ceramic fillers to promote bioactivity and to enhance mechanical properties and osteoblast functions. Among all the requirements, these 3D porous structures should have a controllable average pore size larger than 100 μm as well as good pore interconnectivity to allow vascularization and tissue ingrowth. The goal of this study is to investigate the effect of the addition of a bioactive glass on the porous structure development of the scaffolds prepared by thermally induced phase-separation and also to test the bioactivity of these composite scaffolds. Poly (L-lactic) acid (PLLA) was chosen as the polymer matrix because of its well-known biocompatibility and adjustable physical and mechanical properties. Micron-sized (<10 μm) glass from the 3CaO.P2O5-MgO-SiO2 system was produced in our laboratory and used as the bioactive ceramic filler.

The reinforcement of a soft matrix material with hard particles is an established strategy to develop materials with tailored properties. In this regard, using metallic glasses with high crystallization temperatures, e.g. in the system NiNbX (X = Sn, Ta), for composites produced by liquid metal infiltration is a novel approach. The current work deals with the characterization of such metallic glass particle-reinforced AlSi10Mg-based metal matrix composites manufactured by gas pressure infiltration. Processing–structure–property relations were investigated with a special focus on the influence of an additional heat treatment on the metal matrix composite’s properties. Metallographic methods were used to investigate infiltration quality, particle distribution within the composite and the composite’s microstructure. Moreover, X-ray diffraction measurements, elastic analysis using ultrasonic spectroscopy and compression tests were performed to analyze its properties. The X-ray diffraction results indicate that there is no crystallization of the glass during processing. Metallographic investigations show that the flakes are arranged in a layered structure within the composite. The embedding of metallic glass flakes leads to an increase in Young’s modulus and compressive strength in comparison to the unreinforced material. The composite’s strength can be further increased by a heat treatment.

Gelatin, a natural polymer, provides excellent tissue compatibility for use in tissue rehabilitation. Bioactive glasses (BAG) offer superior capacity in stimulating a bioactive response but show high variability in uptake and solubility. To tackle these drawbacks, a combination of gelatin with BAG is proposed to form composites, which then offer a synergistic response. The cross-linked gelatin structure’s mechanical properties are enhanced by the incorporation of the inorganic BAG, and the rate of BAG ionic supplementation responsible for bioactivity and regenerative potential is better controlled by a protective gelatin layer. Several studies have demonstrated the cellular benefits of these composites in different forms of functional modification such as doping with zinc or incorporation of zinc such as ions directly into the BAG matrix. This review presents a comprehensive perspective on the individual characteristics of BAG and gelatin, including the synthesis and mechanism of action. Further, adaptation of the composite into various applications for bone tissue engineering is discussed and future challenges are highlighted.

In the last years bone tissue engineering has been increasingly indicated as a valid solution to meet the challenging requirements for a healthy bone regeneration in case of bone loss or fracture. In such a context, bioactive glasses have already proved their great potential in promoting the regeneration of new bone tissue due to their high bioactivity. In addition, their composition and structure enable us to incorporate and subsequently release therapeutic ions such as strontium, enhancing the osteogenic properties of the material. The incorporation of these inorganic systems in polymeric matrices enables the formulation of composite systems suitable for the design of bone scaffolds or delivery platforms. Among the natural polymers, type I collagen represents the main organic phase of bone and thus is a good candidate to develop biomimetic bioactive systems for bone tissue regeneration. However, alongside the specific composition and structure, the key factor in the design of new biosystems is creating a suitable interaction with cells and the host tissue. In this scenario, the presented study aimed at combining nano-sized mesoporous bioactive glasses produced by means of a sol–gel route with type I collagen in order to develop a bioactive hybrid formulation suitable for bone tissue engineering applications. The designed system has been fully characterized in terms of physico-chemical and morphological analyses and the ability to release Sr2+ ions has been studied observing a more sustained profile in presence of the collagenous matrix. With the aim to improve the mechanical and thermal stability of the resulting hybrid system, a chemical crosslinking approach using 4-star poly (ethylene glycol) ether tetrasuccinimidyl glutarate (4-StarPEG) has been explored. The biocompatibility of both non-crosslinked and 4-StarPEG crosslinked systems was evaluated by in vitro tests with human osteoblast-like MG-63 cells. Collected results confirmed the high biocompatibility of composites, showing a good viability and adhesion of cells when cultured onto the biomaterial samples.

Over the last years, new alloys were developed to create metallic glasses showing high crystallization temperatures. Such metallic glasses generally can be embedded into other materials when processing temperatures are lower than crystallization temperatures. As recent studies show, feasible crystallization temperatures may exceed the melting point of common metals and fabrication of metallic glass particle reinforced MMCs is now not only possible by powder metallurgical methods but also by processes using melt infiltration. Hence, these metallic glasses offer a high potential for use as reinforcements in a lightweight metal matrix such as aluminum: By incorporation of metallic glass structures into a ductile matrix, it is possible to utilize its outstanding advantages like high strength and elastic strain limit while circumventing its negative properties like brittleness.The particle reinforced composites in this contribution were produced by gas pressure infiltration. This process includes melt infiltration of a particle filled mold using pressurized gas. To keep a sufficient separation between processing temperature and crystallization temperature, the metallic glass Ni60Nb20Ta20 (Tx = 721 °C) and the eutectic aluminum alloy AlSi12 with a low melting point (Tm = 580 °C) as matrix metal were selected for process. After infiltration, the fabricated MMCs were investigated by micro computed tomography (µCT) to analyze the particle distribution within the composite. Furthermore, mechanical tests and elastic analysis using ultrasound spectroscopy were performed to classify its properties.

This study reports on the processing of three-dimensional (3D) chitosan/bioactive glass composite scaffolds. On the one hand, chitosan, as a natural polymer, has suitable properties for tissue engineering applications but lacks bioactivity. On the other hand, bioactive glasses are known to be bioactive and to promote a higher level of bone formation than any other biomaterial type. However, bioactive glasses are hard, brittle, and cannot be shaped easily. Therefore, in the past years, researchers have focused on the processing of new composites. Difficulties in reaching composite materials made of polymer (synthetic or natural) and bioactive glass include: (i) The high glass density, often resulting in glass segregation, and (ii) the fast bioactive glass reaction when exposed to moisture, leading to changes in the glass reactivity and/or change in the polymeric matrix. Samples were prepared with 5, 15, and 30 wt% of bioactive glass S53P4 (BonAlive ®), as confirmed using thermogravimetric analysis. MicrO–Computed tomography and optical microscopy revealed a flaky structure with porosity over 80%. The pore size decreased when increasing the glass content up to 15 wt%, but increased back when the glass content was 30 wt%. Similarly, the mechanical properties (in compression) of the scaffolds increased for glass content up to 15%, but decreased at higher loading. Ions released from the scaffolds were found to lead to precipitation of a calcium phosphate reactive layer at the scaffold surface. This is a first indication of the potential bioactivity of these materials. Overall, chitosan/bioactive glass composite scaffolds were successfully produced with pore size, machinability, and ability to promote a calcium phosphate layer, showing promise for bone tissue engineering and the mechanical properties can justify their use in non-load bearing applications.

Metallic glasses (MGs) have excellent properties, such as high strength and low elastic modulus, can be used as reinforcement in metal matrix composites. In this paper, aluminum matrix composites reinforced with Fe80Si9B11 MG strips with different weight contents (5, 10, 15, 20 and 25%) were produced by roll-bonding at an initial temperature of 450 °C and 80% deformation. Tensile mechanical tests showed that the tensile strength of the composite sheets containing 10% MG strips showed the highest tensile strength of 166 MPa. Further studies on the sandwich structured samples were conducted using high-pressure torsion (HPT) technology with various pressures of 0.55 GPa, 1.10 GPa, 1.65 GPa, and 2.20 GPa. X-ray diffractometry (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), TriboIndenter nanomechanical testing, and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) were used to study the microstructures, mechanical properties and the bonding interface of the material. The results show that the hardness near the interface presented a transition area. High-resolution TEM observation showed that physical metallurgical bonding can be achieved between MG and aluminum alloy. A preliminary fitting of metallurgical bonding conditions was carried out according to the experimental parameters of HPT and the interface bonding condition in this study.

Introdução: O maior foco das pesquisas odontológicas nos últimos 60 anos tem sido a adesão e suas técnicas. Mais de 7000 artigos já foram publicados a este respeito. O desenvolvimento dos materiais odontológicos adesivos e as técnicas a eles relacionadas possuem uma história interessante, onde descobertas do passado ainda são usadas de alguma forma no presente. Objetivo: expor, através de uma revisão de literatura, um breve histórico sobre materiais e técnicas restauradoras, bem como o estágio atual da odontologia adesiva, com ênfase na tradução de evidências baseadas em pesquisas laboratoriais para a prática clínica. Materiais e Métodos: Foram selecionados livros de preferência do autor para a introdução de conceitos clássicos e artigos de revisão publicados nos últimos 10 anos, utilizando as cinco palavras-chave: “Dental Bonding” AND “Dental Cements” AND “Resin Cements” AND “Adhesives” AND “Ceramics”, sorteados pela melhor combinação na plataforma Pub/Med/MEDLINE. Resultados: Duzentos e um artigos, foram encontrados, sendo utilizados para análise qualitativa e quantitativa aqueles pertinentes ao direcionamento do autor, de acordo com o tema. Conclusão: Considerando as limitações do estudo, concluiu-se que a odontologia adesiva é uma área que segue em constante desenvolvimento, fundamental para a realização de restaurações minimamente invasivas e estéticas. Onde para que seja possível consequentemente longevidade clínica, os materiais utilizados e substrato dentário requerem conhecimento do profissional e fidelidade na execução de um correto pré-tratamento das superfícies, respeitando suas naturezas e composições.Descritores: Colagem Dentária; Cimentos Dentários; Cimentos de Resina; Adesivos; Cerâmica.ReferênciasVan Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28:215-35.Miyashita E, Fonseca AS. Odontologia Estética: O estado da arte. São Paulo: Artes Médicas; 2004.Hagger O. Swiss Patent 27894 British Patent 687299, 1951.Buonocore MG, Willeman W, Brudevold F. A Report on a resin composition capable of bonding to human dentin surface. J Dent Res. 1956;35:846-51.Bottino MA, Faria R, Valandro LF. Percepção: estética em próteses livres de metal em dentes naturais e implantes. São Paulo: Artes Médicas, 2009.Larson TD. Using multiple bonding strategies. northwest dent. 2015;94:33-9.Helvey GA. Adhesive dentistry: the development of immediate dentin sealing/selective etching bonding technique. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2011;32:22,24-32,34-5.Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Kaga M, Endo K, Sano H, Oguchi H. In vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds in humans over 1 to 3 years. J Dent Res. 2000;79:1385-91.Mante FK, Ozer F, Walter R, Atlas AM, Saleh N, Dietschi D, et al. The current state of adhesive dentistry: a guide for clinical practice. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2013;34:2-8.Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Open Med. 2009;3:e123-30.Bento A. Como fazer uma revisão de literatura: Considerações teóricas e práticas. Revista JA (Associação Acadêmica da Universidade da Madeira). 2012;65:42-4.Gwinnett AJ. Structure and composition of enamel. Oper Dent. 1992;5:10-7.Mondelli J, Furuse AY, Francischone AC, Pereira MA. Excelência estética e funcional das resinas compostas em dentes posteriores. São Paulo: Artes Médicas; 2004.Garberoglio R, Bränström M. Scanning electron microscopy investigation of human dentinal tubules. Arch Oral Biol. 1976;21:355-62.Pashley DH. Dentin, a dynamic substrate – A review. Scanning Microscopy. 1989;1:161-74.Mazzoni A, Mannello F, Tay FR, Tonti GA, Mazzotti G, Di Lenarda R et al. Zymographic analysis and characterization of MMP-2 and -9 forms in human sound dentin. J Dent Res. 2007;86:436-40.Mankovskaia A, Lévesque CM, Prakki A. Catechin-incorporated dental copolymers inhibit growth of Streptococcus mutans. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013;21:203-7.Sulkala M, Larmas M, Sorsa T, Salo T, Tjäderhane L. The localization of matrix metalloproteinase-20 (MMP-20, enamelysin) in mature human teeth. J Dent Res. 2002;81:603-7.Tjaderhane L, Palosaari H, Wahlgren J, Larmas M, Sorsa T, Salo T. Human odontoblast culture method: the expression of collagen and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). Adv Dent Res. 2001;15:55-8.Wang DY, Zhang L, Fan J, Li F, Ma KQ, Wang P, et al. Matrix metalloproteinases in human sclerotic dentine of attrited molars. Arch Oral Biol. 2012;57:1307-12.Wang Y, Spencer P, Walker MP. Chemicalprofileof adhesive/caries-affected dentin interfaces using Raman microspectroscopy. J Biomed Mat Res. 2007;81A:279-86.Suppa P, Ruggeri A Jr, Tay FR, Prati C, Biasotto M, Falconi M, et al. Reduced antigenicity of type I collagen and proteoglycans in sclerotic dentin. J Dent Res. 2006;85:133-37.Madfa AA, Yue XG. Dental protheses mimic the natural enamel behavior under functional loading: A review article. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2016;52:2-13.Nakabayashi N, Pashley DH. Hybridization of Dental Hard Tissues. Tokio: Quintessence Publishing, 1998.Van Meerbeek B, Vargas M, Inoue S, Yoshida Y, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, et al. Adhesives and cements to promote preservation dentistry. Oper Dent. 2001;6:119-44.Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent. 1997;25:355-72.Imazato S, Tarumi H, Ebi N, Ebisu S. Citotoxic effects of composite restorations employing self-etching primers or experimental antibacterial primers. J Dent. 2000;28:61-7.Alex G. Universal adhesives: the next evolution in adhesive dentistry? Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015;36:15-26.Muñoz MA, Luque I, Hass V, Reis A, Loguercio AD, Bombarda NH. Immediate bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentine. Journal of Dentistry. 2013;41:404–11.Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives Part II: Etching effects on unground enamel. Dental Mater. 2001;17:430-44.Rosa WL, Piva E, Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015;43:765-76.Szesz A, Parreiras S, Reis A, Loguercio A. Selective enamel etching in cervical lesions for self-etch adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016;53:1-11.Kord FP, Lee BP. Recent approches in designing bioadhesive materials inspired by mussel adhesive protein. J Polym Sci A Polym Chem. 2017;55:9-33.Peters MC, McLean ME. Minimally Invasive Operative Care I. Minimal Intervention and Concepts for Minimally Invasive Cavity Preparations. J Ad Dent. 2011;3:7-16.Tyas MJ, Anusavice KJ, Frencken JE, Mount GJ. Minimal Intervention Dentistry – A review. Int Dent J. 2000;50:1-12.Roulet JF, Wilson NHF, Fuzzi M. Advances in Operative Dentistry – Contemporary clinical Practice. Oxford: Quintessence Books, 2000.Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Zafar MS, Khan AS, Zohaib S, Martí JM, et al. Modifications in Glass Ionomer Cements: Nano-Sized Fillers and Bioactive Nanoceramics. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:pii:E1134.Poubel DLN, Almeida JCF, Dias Ribeiro AP, Maia GB, Martinez JMG, Garcia FCP. Effect of dehydration and rehydration intervals on fracture resistance of reattached tooth fragments using multimode adhesive. Dent Traumatol. 2017;33:451-7.Mainjot AK, Dupont NM, Oudkerk JC, Dewael TY, Sadoun MJ. From Artisanal to CAD-CAM Blocks: State of the Art of Indirect Composites. J Dent Res. 2016;95:487-95.Lacy AM. A critical look at posterior composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 1987;114:357-62.Anusavice KJ. Phillips’ Science of dental materials: 11th ed. Philadelphia: W.B, 2003.Bella Dona A. Adesão às cerâmicas: evidências científicas para o uso clínico. São Paulo: Artes Médicas, 2009.Fairhurst CW. Dental ceramics: the state of the Science. Adv Dent Res. 1992;6:78-81.Kurdvk B. Giuseppangelo Fonzi: Industrial fabrication promoter of porcelain prosthetics. J History Dent. 1999;47:79-82.Jones DW, Wilson HJ. Some properties of dental ceramics. J Oral Rehabil. 1975;2:379-96.Messer RL, Lockwood PE, Wataha JC, Lewis JB, Norris S, Bouillaguet S. In vitro cytotoxicity of traditional versus contemporary dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90:452-58.Zarone F, Ferrari M, Mangano FG, Leone R, Sorrentino R. Digitally oriented materials: focus on lithium disilicate ceramics. Int J Dent. 2016:9840594.Shen Z, Nygren M. Microstructural prototyping of ceramics by Kinect engineering: applications of spark plasma sintering. Chem Rec. 2005;5:173-84.Denry I, Kelly JR. Emerging ceramic-based materials for dentistry. J Dent Res. 2014;93: 1235-42.Baier RE. Principles of adhesion. Oper Dent. 1992;5:1-9.Erickson RL. Surface interactions of dentin adhesive materials. Oper Dent. 1992;5:81-94.Ruyter, IE. The chemistry of adhesive agents. Oper Dent. 1992;5-11.Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Baier RE, Eick JD. Microtopography and clinical adhesiveness of an acid etched tooth surface. An vivo study. Acta Odontolol Scand. 1981;39:47-53.Van Meerbeek B, Perdigão J, Lambrechts P, Vanherie G. The Clinical performance adhesives. J Dent Res. 1998;26:1-20.De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res. 2005;84:118-32.Matei R, Popescu MR, Suciu M, Rauten AM. Clinical dental adhesive application: the influence on composite-enamel interface morphology. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2014;55:863-68.Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res. 1955;34:849-53.Chow LC, Brown, WE. Phosphoric acid conditioning of teeth for pit and fissure sealants. J Dent Res. 1973;1517-25.Bastos PA, Retief DH, Bradley EL, Denys FR. Effect of duration on the shear bond strength of a microfill composite resin to enamel. Am J Dent. 1988;1:151-57.Gwinnett AJ. Acid etching for composite resins. Dent Clin North Amer. 1981;25:271-89.Retief DH. Are adhesives techniques suficiente to prevent microleakage? Symposium of Dental Materials, Pulp Biology Group, IADR, The Netherlands. 1986.Causton BE. Improved bonding of composite restorative to dentin. Br Dent J. 1984;156:93-5.Mitchen JC, Gronas DG. Effects of time after extraction and depth of dentin on resin dentin adhesives. J Am Dent Ass. 1986;113:285-89.Heymann HO, Bayne SC. Current concepts in dentin bonding: focusing in dentin adhesion factors. J Am Dent Ass. 1993;124:27-36.Dbradović-Djuricić K, Medić V, Dodić S, Gavrilov D, Antonijević D, Zrilić M. Dilemmas in zirconia bonding: a review. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2013;141:395-401.Chen C, Chen Y, Lu Z, Qian M, Xie H, Tay FR. The effects of water on degradation of the zirconia-resin bond. J Dent. 2017;pii: S0300-5712, 17, 30088-X.Naumova EA, Ernst S, Schaper K, Arnold WH, Piwowarczyk A. Adhesion of different resin cements to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater J. 2016;35:345-52.Novais VR, Rapouso LH, Miranda RR, Lopes CC, Simamoto PC Júnior, Soares CJ. Degree of conversion and bond strength of resin-cements to feldspathic ceramic using different curing modes. J Appl Oral Sci. 2017;25:61-8.Giannini M, Takagaki T, Bacelar-Sá R, Vermelho PM, Ambrosano GMB, Sadr A et al. Influence of resin coating on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin. Dent Mat J. 2015;34:822-7.Ferracane JL, Stansbury JW, Burke FJ. Self-adhesive resin cements —chemistry, properties and clinical considerations. J Oral Rehabil. 2011; 38:295-314.De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding o fan auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 2004;20:963-71.Abo-Hamar SE, Hiller KA, Jung H, Federlin M, Friedl KH, Schmalz G. Bond strength of a new universal self-adhesive resin lutin cement to dentin and enamel. Clin Oral Invest. 2005;9:161-7.Aguiar TR, Di Francescantonio M, Ambrosano GM, Giannini M. Effect of curing mode on bod strength of self-adhesive resin luting cements to dentin. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2010;93B:122-7.Asmussen E, Peutzeldt A. Bonding of dual-curing resin cements to dentin. J Adhes Dent. 2006;8:299-304.Cantoro A, Goracci C, Papacchini F, Mazzitelli C, Fadda GM, Ferrari M. Effect of pre-cure temperature on the bonding potential of self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater. 2008;24:577-83.76.Hitz T, Stawarczyk B, Fischer J, Hämmerle CH, Sailer I. Are self-sdhesive resin cement a valid alternative to conventional resin cements? A laboratory study of the long-term bond strength. Dent Mater. 2012;28:1183-90.Özcan M, Bernasconi M. Adhesion to zirconia used for dental restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2015;17:7-26.Ganapathy D, Sathyamoorthy A, Ranganathan H, Murthykumar K. Effect of resin bonded luting agents influencing marginal discrepancy in all ceramic complete veneer crowns. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:ZC67-ZC70.Lorenzoni E Silva F, Pamato S, Kuga MC, Só MV, Pereira JR. Bond strength of adhesive resin cement with different adhesive systems. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017;9:96-100.Spitznagel FA, Horvath SD, Guess PC, Blatz MB. Resin bond to indirect composite and new ceramic/polymer materials: a review of the literature. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26:382-93.