Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.2
3.9
Journals
Biomimetics
Special Issues
Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition
share announcement

Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition

A special issue of Biomimetics (ISSN 2313-7673). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomimetics of Materials and Structures".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 March 2026 | Viewed by 4557

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Hamid Nurrohman

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Restorative Dentistry & Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry at Houston, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX, USA
Interests: cariology; biomimetic remineralization; biomimetic restorations; clinical translation
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue, entitled "Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition", explores the latest advancements in dentistry that aim to replicate the natural properties and aesthetics of teeth through innovative restoration techniques. This collection offers a comprehensive insight into materials science, adhesive technologies, and the clinical procedures involved in creating restorations that mimic the appearance of natural teeth and their functionality and durability. By focusing on biomimetic approaches, this Special Issue highlights methods that promote the preservation of tooth structure, enhance the bond strength between the restoration material and tooth, and encourage the regeneration of tooth tissues. This Special Issue will also pay particular attention to the development of novel materials that better replicate the mechanical and optical properties of natural teeth. Innovative research on adhesive systems that enhance the performance of these restorations in challenging clinical scenarios is also welcome. Overall, this Special Issue aims to address the need for more natural, durable, and aesthetically pleasing dental restorations, providing valuable insights for researchers and practitioners in dentistry.

Dr. Hamid Nurrohman
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Biomimetics is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • biomimetics
  • dentistry
  • bonded restorations
  • adhesive technology
  • materials science
  • tooth regeneration
  • aesthetic dentistry
  • durability
  • mechanical properties
  • optical properties

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

13 pages, 1653 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength in the Repair of Additively and Subtractively Manufactured CAD/CAM Materials Using Bulk-Fill Composites
by Selinsu Öztürk, Ezgi Altuntaş, Ayşe Aslı Şenol, Erkut Kahramanoğlu, Pınar Yılmaz Atalı, Bilge Tarçın and Cafer Türkmen
Biomimetics 2025, 10(7), 433; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10070433 - 1 Jul 2025
Viewed by 334
Abstract
Biomimetic restorative protocols aim to preserve natural tooth structure while enhancing restoration longevity. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) in the repair of additively and subtractively manufactured CAD/CAM materials using bulk-fill resin composites and to assess the [...] Read more.
Biomimetic restorative protocols aim to preserve natural tooth structure while enhancing restoration longevity. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) in the repair of additively and subtractively manufactured CAD/CAM materials using bulk-fill resin composites and to assess the effect of thermocycling. Forty rectangular specimens (14.5 × 7 × 3 mm) were prepared from Grandio Blocs (GB, VOCO) and VarseoSmile CrownPlus (VS, BEGO), and thermocycled (5000 cycles, 5–55 °C, 20 s dwell time). All surfaces were roughened with 50 μm Al2O3. Samples were repaired using VisCalor (VCB, VOCO) and Charisma Bulk Flow One (CBO, Kulzer) composites (n = 10 per group) with their respective adhesives. Each group was further divided into immediate and post-thermocycling subgroups. All specimens were tested under shear force until failure, and failure types were examined under a stereomicroscope. Representative samples were examined by SEM to evaluate filler morphology. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS v23 (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences in SBS were found between groups (p > 0.05). Mean SBS values were highest in VS-CBO and lowest in GB-CBO. Cohesive failures were more frequent in immediate groups, while adhesive failures predominated after thermocycling. Bulk-fill composites did not influence the repair bond strength of indirect materials. Thermocycling affected the failure type, though not the SBS values. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1519 KiB  
Article
Comparative Evaluation of Color Stability in Bioactive and Conventional Resin Cements Under Thermal Stress Conditions
by Alaa Turkistani and Hanin E. Yeslam
Biomimetics 2025, 10(7), 432; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10070432 - 1 Jul 2025
Viewed by 320
Abstract
Bioactive resin-based cements (RBCs) were recently introduced, but data on their color stability remain limited. This study analyzed the impact of thermal cycling on the color and whiteness of bioactive RBCs. Specimens (n = 10) were fabricated from Panavia SA Universal (PN), Predicta [...] Read more.
Bioactive resin-based cements (RBCs) were recently introduced, but data on their color stability remain limited. This study analyzed the impact of thermal cycling on the color and whiteness of bioactive RBCs. Specimens (n = 10) were fabricated from Panavia SA Universal (PN), Predicta Bioactive Cement (PR), and ACTIVA BioACTIVE cement (AC). CIE Lab* values were registered at baseline and after 5000, 10,000, and 15,000 thermal cycles (5–55 °C). Changes in color (ΔE00) and whiteness index (ΔWID) were calculated and compared. Material type and thermal cycling significantly affected ΔE00 and ΔWID (p < 0.001). AC showed the highest ΔE00 values at all stages (p < 0.001), with a progressive increase over time. PN differed significantly between early and later cycles (p < 0.05), while PR remained stable (p > 0.05). Analysis of color parameters indicated that AC underwent the most pronounced changes, particularly in Δa and Δb, while PN exhibited the greatest shift in Δb. For ΔWID, PR had significantly lower values than PN (p < 0.05) and AC (p < 0.001), with no difference between PN and AC (p > 0.05), and thermal cycling significantly affected all groups, with PR and AC differing across all stages (p < 0.05). Thermal cycling significantly influenced the color stability and whiteness of bioactive RBCs, with AC exhibiting the greatest changes over time, while PR demonstrated superior stability. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1955 KiB  
Article
Adhesive Performance of Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate Maryland Cantilever Restorations on Prepared and Non-Prepared Abutment Teeth: An In Vitro Comparative Study
by Tareq Hajaj, Ioana Elena Lile, Radu Marcel Negru, Serban Talpos Niculescu, Sami Stuparu, Mihai Rominu, Cosmin Sinescu, Paul Albu, Florina Titihazan and Ioana Veja
Biomimetics 2025, 10(7), 413; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10070413 - 21 Jun 2025
Viewed by 421
Abstract
Aim: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the adhesive performance of zirconia and lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations on prepared and non-prepared anterior abutment teeth. While conventional clinical protocols involve abutment tooth preparation, no-preparation (no-prep) restorations have emerged as a viable, minimally [...] Read more.
Aim: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the adhesive performance of zirconia and lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations on prepared and non-prepared anterior abutment teeth. While conventional clinical protocols involve abutment tooth preparation, no-preparation (no-prep) restorations have emerged as a viable, minimally invasive alternative. This study compared the adhesion fracture resistance (N) of zirconia restorations on non-prepared enamel surfaces with those on prepared surfaces exposing the dentin. Additionally, the zirconia restorations were compared with lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations, a more common yet costly alternative. Materials and Methods: Forty extracted anterior teeth were allocated into four groups based on preparation type (prepared vs. non-prepared) and material (zirconia vs. lithium disilicate). Each group received cantilevered single-unit FPDs fabricated via CAD/CAM and adhesively cemented using Variolink® Esthetic DC. Standardized loading was applied using a universal testing machine, and the fracture resistance was recorded. Results: The fracture resistance ranged from 190 to 447 N in the zirconia groups and from 219 to 412 N in the lithium disilicate groups. When comparing all the zirconia versus all the lithium disilicate ceramic restorations, regardless of tooth preparation, no statistically significant difference was found (p = 0.752). However, the non-prepared restorations exhibited significantly higher fracture resistance than their prepared counterparts (p = 0.004 for zirconia; p = 0.012 for lithium disilicate ceramic). All the failures were attributed to tooth fracture, except one zirconia restoration, with no debonding observed. Conclusions: Both zirconia and lithium disilicate Maryland cantilever restorations demonstrated reliable adhesive performance when bonded using appropriate surface conditioning and adhesive protocols. Interestingly, the non-prepared designs exhibited higher fracture resistance than the prepared abutments, highlighting their potential advantage in minimally invasive restorative dentistry. Zirconia Maryland bridges, in particular, represent a cost-effective and mechanically resilient option for anterior single-tooth replacement. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 9182 KiB  
Article
Effect of Different Luting Methods on the Microtensile Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Resin Blocks
by Alexandra Vinagre, Carla Delgado, Gabriela Almeida, Ana Messias and João Carlos Ramos
Biomimetics 2025, 10(2), 123; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10020123 - 19 Feb 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 763
Abstract
The widespread implementation of new CAD/CAM materials has led to the necessity of establishing an adequate luting protocol. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and the film thickness of different luting methods on CAD/CAM resin blocks. [...] Read more.
The widespread implementation of new CAD/CAM materials has led to the necessity of establishing an adequate luting protocol. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and the film thickness of different luting methods on CAD/CAM resin blocks. Five Brilliant Crios CAD/CAM blocks (Coltene/Whaledent) were sequentially sectioned into two halves, air abraded with 50 µm aluminum oxide, and luted according to five different cementation protocols: Brilliant EverGlow (BEG), Brilliant EverGlow with ultrasound application (BEG-US), preheated Brilliant EverGlow (BEG-H), Brilliant EverGlow Flow (BEGF), and Duo Cem® Trans (DC). Subsequently, the blocks were sectioned to obtain rods, which were then submitted to a microtensile bond strength test (n = 20). The surfaces were examined with optical microscopy to determine the failure mode and the bonding interface was assessed with scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis. Bond strength values were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc tests (α = 0.05). The bond strength values varied with the different cementation protocols (p < 0.001): BEG (45.48 ± 18.14 MPa), BEG-US (42.15 ± 14.90 MPa), BEG-H (41.23 ± 15.15 MPa), BEGF (58.38 ± 15.65 MPa), and DC (81.07 ± 8.75 MPa). Regarding bond strength, DC presented significantly higher values than all other experimental groups (p < 0.050), whereas all luting methods using BEG presented similar values (p = 0.894). Adhesive failures were the predominant type. On SEM evaluation, all the luting materials presented a tight and homogeneous cement–block interface with variable film thicknesses. In conclusion, among the cementation protocols, the resin cement (DC) rendered the highest bond strength values. SEM analysis revealed that the lowest film thickness was associated with the flowable composite (BEGF). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

19 pages, 4442 KiB  
Review
Bonding Protocols for Lithium Disilicate Veneers: A Narrative Review and Case Study
by Silvia Rojas-Rueda, Jose Villalobos-Tinoco, Clint Conner, Staley Colvert, Hamid Nurrohman and Carlos A. Jurado
Biomimetics 2025, 10(3), 188; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10030188 - 19 Mar 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2274
Abstract
Background: The bonding protocol for lithium disilicate veneers in the esthetic zone plays a crucial role in modern dental restoration techniques, focusing on the replication of natural tooth properties and esthetics. This process involves several meticulous steps on both ceramic and tooth surfaces [...] Read more.
Background: The bonding protocol for lithium disilicate veneers in the esthetic zone plays a crucial role in modern dental restoration techniques, focusing on the replication of natural tooth properties and esthetics. This process involves several meticulous steps on both ceramic and tooth surfaces to optimize material performance and bond strength. Methods: The objective of this article is to provide an updated review of the literature on the clinical steps for bonding lithium disilicate veneers in the anterior dentition and to document a clinical case where these advanced restorative techniques were applied to treat a female patient seeking to improve her smile. A preliminary review was conducted on the existing literature regarding the clinical protocols for bonding lithium disilicate veneers in the esthetic zone. The main advantage of careful bonding procedures is that they maximize the full potential of the materials’ properties. Results: A review of the literature reveals some minor differences in cleaning the veneers prior to cementation and in the number of steps involved when combining certain materials in a single application process. However, well-executed bonding procedures, following the manufacturer’s recommendations, can maximize the adhesion between the ceramic and the tooth, allowing the restorations to meet the patient’s esthetic demands. Conclusions: Effective bonding of lithium disilicate veneers in the esthetic zone requires multiple treatments on both the ceramic and tooth surfaces. When procedures are followed carefully, long-term esthetic and functional outcomes can be achieved. It is essential that clinicians are familiar with these steps. Proper patient selection, thoughtful treatment planning, and methodical execution of the case can lead to highly esthetic results that satisfy the patient’s demands and ensure long-term success. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomimetic Bonded Restorations for Dental Applications: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-5
Back to TopTop