Effects of Two Different Acid Etching and Surface Washing Methods on Bond Strength on Different CAD-CAM Blocks under Aging Protocols

Table 1

Materials used in the study.

Material	Chemical composition	Manufacturer
IPS e.max CAD	57-80% SiO2, 11-19% Li2O, K2O, MgO, Al2O3, P2O5, and other oxides	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
Celtra Duo	SiO2, Li2O, ZrO2 P2O5, Al2O3, K2O CeO2	Celtra Duo Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany
Monobond Etch and Prime (MEP)	Butanol, tetrabutylammonium dihydrogen trifluoride, methacrylate phosphoric acid ester, bis (triethoxysilyl) ethane, silane methacrylate, colorant, ethanol, water	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
Monobond S (MP)	Ethanol, water, silane methacrylate	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
IPS ceramic etching gel	5% hydrofluoric acid	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
Multilink Automix	Dimethacrylates, HEMA (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate), barium glass filler, Ba-Al-fluorosilicate glass, ytterbium trifluoride, silica, catalysts, stabilizer, pigments	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
N-Etch etching gel	37% phosphoric acid	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein
Tetric N-Ceram	Fillers: barium glass, ytterbium trifluoride, barium alumino-fluorosilicate glass, silica; Resins: BIS-GMA, UDMA, and TEGDMA	Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein