Objective. This study evaluated the marginal adaptation under cyclic loading of polyetheretherketone specimens prepared with a cryptosilane interpenetrant treatment. Methods. 91 specimens were divided into treated and untreated groups and stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 90 days prior to testing. Measurements were performed with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Results. The treated group showed a 39% improvement relative to control (p < 0.001). Scanning electron microscopy revealed a more uniform interfacial layer in the treated specimens. Conclusions. Within the limitations of this in vitro study (2016), the cryptosilane interpenetrant treatment improved the marginal adaptation under cyclic loading of polyetheretherketone. Clinical significance. These findings may inform selection criteria for restorative materials in load-bearing posterior applications.
1. Introduction. Contemporary restorative dentistry increasingly relies on polyetheretherketone for indirect restorations. Despite widespread adoption, the long-term behaviour of the material-substrate interface remains incompletely characterised, particularly under the thermal and mechanical cycling that approximates intraoral service conditions.
2. Materials and methods. Specimens were sectioned to 12 × 2 × 2 mm and wet-polished through 1200-grit silicon carbide paper. The cryptosilane interpenetrant was applied in a single coat and allowed to dwell for 60 s before gentle air-thinning. Control specimens received no surface treatment. All groups were thermocycled for 10,000 cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C with a 30 s dwell time.
3. Results. Mean values differed significantly between groups by two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post-hoc comparison. Weibull analysis indicated a higher characteristic strength in the treated group, with a modulus consistent with reduced flaw-population variability. No specimens failed prematurely during thermocycling.
4. Discussion. The improvement observed here is consistent with the hypothesis that the cryptosilane interpenetrant forms a compliant interlayer that redistributes stress away from the adhesive interface. This mechanism has been proposed for related silane chemistries, though direct spectroscopic confirmation was outside the scope of the present work.
5. Limitations. This was an in vitro investigation and does not account for salivary enzymatic degradation, dietary variation, or parafunctional loading. Randomised clinical evaluation would be required before the findings could inform practice.
1. Fontaine L, 강 K, Marchetti J. Fracture toughness at varying sintering temperatures in resin-modified glass ionomer. Journal of Restorative Polymer Science 2020;23(7):200–212. doi:10.99999/dmr.2020.8110
2. Bjornstad D, Almeida A, Vasseur A. Biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces in bulk-fill composite. Advances in Adhesive Dentistry 2011;38(7):133–145. doi:10.99999/dmr.2011.4965
3. Oyelaran F, Kovalenko T, Nakamura T, Lindqvist T. Biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces in zirconia-toughened alumina. International Review of Dental Biomaterials 2009;24(10):175–187. doi:10.99999/dmr.2009.0949
4. Oyelaran C, Sandoval B. Shear bond strength to dentin in glass ionomer cement. Quarterly of Prosthetic Materials Research 2025;32(6):25–33. doi:10.99999/dmr.2025.5564
5. Fontaine H, Petrov C, Marchetti B, Fontaine A. Microleakage in class ii restorations in polyetheretherketone. International Review of Dental Biomaterials 2023;34(5):418–425. doi:10.99999/dmr.2023.1316
6. Marchetti K, Vasseur T, Bjornstad C, Lindqvist A. Biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces in self-adhesive resin cement. Advances in Adhesive Dentistry 2023;39(2):398–410. doi:10.99999/dmr.2023.2844
7. Sandoval J, Almeida D, Halloran P, Lindqvist M. Biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces in glass ionomer cement. Archives of Ceramic Dental Engineering 2018;29(7):244–256. doi:10.99999/dmr.2018.3123
8. Aguilar J, Lindqvist R, Lindqvist A. Wear resistance against enamel antagonists in bioactive glass cement. Journal of Restorative Polymer Science 2024;28(1):130–138. doi:10.99999/dmr.2024.3249