BMC Oral Health (Apr 2024)

Comparison of the shear bond strengths of two different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) framework materials and CAD–CAM veneer materials

  • Gonca Deste Gökay,
  • Seda Üstün Aladağ

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04247-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 10

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of two different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and CAD-CAM materials after aging. Methods A total of 42 frameworks were designed and milled from 2 different PEEK discs (Copra Peek, P and BioHPP, B). P and B frameworks were divided into 3 subgroups (n = 7). 14 slices were prepared each from feldspathic ceramic (Vitablocs Mark II, VM), hybrid nanoceramic (Cerasmart, CS), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (Vita Enamic, VE) blocks. After surface preparations, the slices were cemented to P and B surfaces. The samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles). SBS of all the samples was measured. Fractured surfaces were examined by SEM/EDX analysis. The Shapiro–Wilk, Two-way Robust ANOVA and Bonferroni correction tests were used to analyze the data (a = .05). Results Frameworks, ceramics, and frameworks x ceramics had significant differences (p 0.05). According to EDX analysis, ytterbium and fluorine was seen in B content, unlike P. While VM and CS contained fluorine, barium, and aluminum; sodium and aluminum were observed in the VE structure. Conclusion Bonding of P and B with VM offers higher SBS. VM, CS and VE did not make any difference in SBS for P, however VM showed a significant difference for B.

Keywords