Comparison of Bond Strength of Monolithic CAD-CAM Materials to Resin Cement Using Different Surface Treatment Methods

<jats:sec><jats:title>Objective:</jats:title><jats:p> To compare the bond strength of monolithic CAD-CAM materials to resin cement using different surface treatment methods. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Materials and Methods:</jats:title><jats:p> Lithium disilicate glass ceramic (IPS e-max CAD), zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (Vita Suprinity), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate), and hybrid ceramic (Vita Enamic) were used. Five groups of CAD-CAM blocks were treated as follows: control (C), HF etching (HF), HF etching + silanization (HF + S), sandblasting (SB), and sandblasting + silanization (SB + S). After surface treatments, SEM analyses were conducted. Specimens were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement (Theracem) and stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h. Shear bond strength (SBS) was measured, and failure types were categorized. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and the post-hoc Tukey test. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results:</jats:title><jats:p> Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between SBS values obtained for different surface treatments and CAD-CAM block types ( P < .001). Among the CAD-CAM materials, the highest SBS was reported in the HF + S group for Vita Enamic. Although IPS e.max CAD, Vita Suprinity, and Vita Enamic showed higher bond strength when treated with HF + S, Lava Ultimate has the highest bond strength value when treated with SB + S. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions:</jats:title><jats:p> The bond strength of CAD-CAM materials was influenced by surface treatment. Additionally, silanization significantly improved the bond strength of all materials except Lava Ultimate. </jats:p></jats:sec>