Zogheib, Lucas V.Lopes, Guilherme R. [UNESP]Matos, Jefferson D. [UNESP]Castro, Daniel S.Bottino, Marco A. [UNESP]McCabe, JohnKimpara, Estevão T. [UNESP]2022-04-282022-04-282021-08-01Minerva Dental and Oral Science, v. 70, n. 4, p. 133-141, 2021.2724-63372724-6329http://hdl.handle.net/11449/222090METHODS: Forty (40) human third molars received conventional full coverage preparation. After performing digital impressions of teeth preparations, ceramic blocks were machined using a CAD/CAM system in order to obtain the crowns. The crowns were distributed in 4 groups as ceramic surface treatment (N.=10): (HF) - 4.9% HF for 20s + air-water spray for 30s; (HFN) - HF + neutralizing agent for 5 min (N); (HFU) - HF + ultrasonic bath for 5 min (U); e (HFNU) - HF + N + U. SEM and EDS analysis was performed in each group in order to characterize the ceramic surface and to verify the chemical element distribution after HF cleaning protocols. A silane layer was applied (for 60s), and crowns were then cemented with dual resin cement. A compressive load was applied on the middle of the occlusal crown surface with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until fracture. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey test (a=0.05). RESULTS: Fluoride ions were found in samples of all postetching cleaning protocols. The mean value (Kgf) was: HF =169.92±21.37; HFN =187.34±34.79; HFU =166.63±40.22 and HFNU=175.26±40.22. The ceramic surface treatment after HF etching did not significantly influence (P>0.05) the compressive strength of the tested ceramic crowns. CONCLUSIONS: Surface treatments with neutralizing agent associated with the ultrasonic bath as the pre-cementation protocol was the most efficient protocol in eliminating the precipitate deposited on the porosities created by acid etching.133-141engCeramicsCompressive strengthDental stress analysisHydrofluoric acidTooth crownArtigo10.23736/S2724-6329.20.04330-72-s2.0-85111561845