Purpose: To evaluate the influence of heat treatment (HT) procedures of a pre-hydrolyzed silane on bond strength of resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic. Materials and Methods: Ceramic and composite blocks (N = 30) were divided into six groups (n = 5) and subjected to the following conditioning procedures: G1: 9.6% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 20 s + silane (RelyX Ceramic Primer, 3M ESPE) + resin cement (Panavia F2.0, Kuraray) (control); G2: HF (20 s) + silane + heat treatment in furnace (HTF) (100°C, 2 min) + resin cement; G3: silane + HTF + resin cement; G4- HF (20 s) + silane + heat treatment with hot air (HTA) (50 ± 5°C for 1 min) + resin cement; G5: silane + HTA + resin cement; G6: silane + resin cement. The microtensile bond strength (MTBS) test was performed using a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). After debonding, the substrate and adherent surfaces were analyzed using a stereomicroscope and SEM to categorize the failure types. The data were statistically evaluated using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%). Results: The control group (G1) showed no pre-test failures and presented significantly higher mean MTBS (16.01 ± 1.12 MPa) than did other groups (2.63 ± 1.05 to 12.55 ± 1.52 MPa) (p = 0.0001). In the groups where HF was not used, HTF (G3: 12.55 ± 1.52 MPa) showed significantly higher MTBS than did HTA (G5: 2.63 ± 1.05 MPa) (p 0.05). All failure types were mixed, ie, adhesive between the resin cement and ceramic accompanied by cohesive failure in the cement. Conclusion: Heat treatment procedures for the pre-hydrolyzed silane either in a furnace or with the application of hot air cannot replace the use of HF gel for the adhesion of resin cement to feldspathic ceramic. Yet when mean bond strengths and incidence of pre-test failures are considered, furnace heat treatment delivered the second best results after the control group, being considerably better than hot air application. Palabras clave: adhesion, cementation, ceramics, microtensile bond strength, silane coupling agent