To evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the bonding strength between highly translucent zirconia and veneering porcelain and to provide a research basis for improving the zirconium porcelain bond strength between zirconium and ceramic material.

Thirty cylindrical zirconia blocks with 10-mm diameter and 10-mm height were prepared and divided into four groups (n＝7), labeled as control group (C), sandblasting group (S), bonding group (B), and sandblasting and bonding group (SB). The surface morphology of zirconia before and after sandblasting was observed in the remaining two specimens. Group C was veneered (2 mm in height and 5 mm in diameter) with porcelain powder by layering after grinding. Group S was sandblasted after grinding. Group B was veneered with a thin layer of porcelain powder as bond coating. Group SB was sandblasted and veneered with a thin layer of porcelain powder. After sintering, the shear specimens were embedded, and a shear bond strength test was conducted. Statistical analysis was conducted to analyze the data. Fracture surface analysis was also performed to determine the failure modes by stereomicroscopy.

The bonding strength of group C was 21.86 ± 3.18 MPa. For group S, it was 22.12 ± 3.06 MPa. For group B, it was 19.19 ± 1.46 MPa. Finally, for group SB, it was 27.76 ± 1.95 MPa. There was no significant difference in shear strength between group C, group S and group B. There was a significant difference in shear strength between each group and group SB (P < 0.05). Under a stereomicroscope, the observed fracture modes of each group were mainly mixed failure.

Sandblasting cannot significantly increase the bonding strength between zirconia and veneering porcelain. Veneering with a thin layer of porcelain powder as the bond coating has no obvious effect on the bonding strength. Sandblasting and veneering with a thin layer of porcelain powder as a bond coating can significantly improve the bonding strength between zirconia and veneering porcelain.

To evaluate the effect of heat treatment on the bonding strength of pure titanium formed by selective laser melting (SLM) and porcelain.

Ninety-six pure titanium specimens were laser machined to meet ISO 9693 standards. The specimens were divided into a heat treated group (A) and a nonheat treated group (B). According to the porcelain type, the specimens in groups A and B were divided into Super Ti22 (a), Titankeramik (b), and Triceram (c) groups. Then, according to sandblasting pressures of 0.25 MPa (1) and 0.45 MPa (2), they were further divided into Aa1, Aa2, Ab1, Ab2, Ac1, Ac2, Ba1, Ba2, Bb1, Bb2, Bc1, and Bc2 groups. The surface morphology and roughness of the sandblasted specimens were assessed using a laser scanning confocal microscope. After the porcelain was fused, the three-point bending titanium-porcelain bonding strength was tested. A stereomicroscope was used to characterize the titanium-porcelain interfaces and determine the mode of failure.

The Vickers hardness of group A specimens (188.21 ± 11.94) was significantly lower than that of group B specimens (204.48 ± 6.32) HV (P<0.05). The roughness value in group A1 (2.90 ± 0.32) μm was significantly lower than that in group A2 (3.43 ± 0.43) μm (P<0.05). Specimens in group B1 (2.62 ± 0.08) μm were significantly smaller than those in group B2 (3.01 ± 0.06) μm (P<0.05). The bonding strength in group Aa1 was (33.75 ± 2.31) MPa, group Aa2 was (36.32 ± 1.44) MPa, group Ab1 was (39.82 ± 2.28) MPa, group Ab2 was (33.74 ± 1.53) MPa and group Ac2 was (38.63 ± 1.36) MPa, which was significantly higher than that in the corresponding groups Ba1 (29.65 ± 1.10) MPa, Ba2 (27.17 ± 2.24) MPa, Bb1 (27.29 ± 1.61) MPa, Bb2 (23.85 ± 0.97) MPa, and Bc2 (35.75 ± 1.93) MPa (P<0.05). With increasing sandblasting pressure, the bonding strength of the titanium ceramic in group Aa2 was significantly higher than in group Aa1, while that in group Ab2 was significantly lower than that in group Ab1 (P<0.05). In groups A, Bc1 and Bc2, the fracture model showed mixed failure, while in groups Ba1, Ba2, Bb1, and Bb2, the model showed interfacial failure.

The Vickers hardness of SLM titanium can be significantly reduced by heat treatment. SLM pure titanium after heat treatment is beneficial to combination of the three porcelain types and titanium. The titanium-porcelain bonding strength may be affected by sandblasting pressure.