## 3 Results  
One control group, three priming agents (Z-PRIME Plus, ALL BOND UNIVERSAL and Monobond N) and three self-adhesive resin cements (TheraCam, Activa BioActive, and RelyX U200) were tested in this study to evaluate the shear bond strength to zirconia. Most of the control specimens failed during thermocycling, and those specimens which survived (6/30 specimens) were the weakest among all tested groups. Due to the limited number of control specimens, they were excluded from the statistical analysis. The descriptive analysis is presented in Table 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline
**Materials** & **Manufacturer** & **Composition** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{ACTIVA BioACTIVE (A)} & \multirow{4}{*}{Pulpdet  } & Base: Methcacrylate monomers containing phosphoric acid groups, methacrylate monomers, silanated fillers, initiator components, stabilizer, \\  & & and Rheological additives. \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Catalyst: Methcacrylate monomers, alkaline (basic) fillers, silanated fillers, \\ \cline{1-1}  & & initiator components, stabilizer, pigments, and rheological additives. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: _Cont._One-Way ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between the test groups (\(p<0.0001\)) (Table 3). Bonferroni Pairwise comparisons showed that MNRx had the highest shear bond strength to zirconia (16.46 \(\pm\) 5.97 MPa), followed by ABRx (13.42 \(\pm\) 2.28 MPa) and MNA (13.03 \(\pm\) 4.32) which were significantly higher than other combinations. General Linear Model (GLM) revealed that the priming agent (\(p<0.001\)), cement type (\(p<0.001\)), and their interaction (\(p=0.027\)) had a significant effect on shear bond strength to zirconia. Table 4 and Figure 2.  
\begin{table} \begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & **Type III Sum of Square** & **df** & **Mean Square** & **F** & \(p^{*}\) \\ \hline Corrected Model & 1332.86 & 8 & 166.61 & 16.30 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Intercept & 6818.81 & 1 & 6818.81 & 667.28 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Priming agent & 777.11 & 2 & 388.56 & 38.02 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Cement type & 420.03 & 2 & 210.02 & 20.55 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Interaction & 119.14 & 4 & 29.78 & 2.91 & 0.027 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Error & 745.97 & 73 & 10.22 & & \\ \hline Total & 9023.36 & 82 & & \\ \hline Corrected Total & 2078.83 & 81 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} 
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & **Type III Sum of Square** & **df** & **Mean Square** & **F** & \(p^{*}\) \\ \hline Corrected Model & 1332.86 & 8 & 166.61 & 16.30 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Intercept & 6818.81 & 1 & 6818.81 & 667.28 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Priming agent & 777.11 & 2 & 388.56 & 38.02 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Cement type & 420.03 & 2 & 210.02 & 20.55 & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Interaction & 119.14 & 4 & 29.78 & 2.91 & 0.027 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Error & 745.97 & 73 & 10. Estimated marginal means of the shear bond strength data by independent variable \"priming agent\" are summarized in Table 5. Pairwise comparisons showed that there was a significant difference between all the groups (\(p<0.001\)). Estimated marginal means of the SBS data by the independent variable \"Cement type\" are summarized in Table 6. Pairwise comparisons showed that there was a significant difference between the groups (\(p<0.001\)). For the analysis of the distribution of failure modes, the Chi-square test showed that the priming agent had a significant effect on the fracture mode (\(p<0.001\)) (Table 7). Monobond N had the largest mixed failure mode (93.3%). Regarding other conditioning agents, mostly adhesive failures were noted at 63.3% for ZP and 83.3% for AB. On the other hand, the cement type had no significant effect on the failure mode (\(p=0.733\)) (Table 8) (Figure 3).