Influence of surface treatments to repair recent fillings of silorane-and methacrylate-based composites

Kaneko, Marina; Caldas, Ricardo Armini; Feitosa, Victor Pinheiro; Schneider, Luís Felipe Jochims; Bacchi, Ataís

doi:10.4103/0972-0707.157265

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Degradation of any tooth restorative material starts when it is put under function and it is expected over time ( 19 ). The main indications for composite repair is premature fractures, partial loss of restoration or adjacent tooth structure, need for re-contour, deficient contact point, infra-occlusion, inadequate anatomy, as well as chipping ( 13 , 20 , 21 ). Recently the restorative dentistry advocates for the minimal invasive philosophy, preferring the repair of partial function restoration than its complete change, aiming to avoid the weakening of the tooth structure by removal of the entire filling with burs ( 21 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main indications for composite repair is premature fractures, partial loss of restoration or adjacent tooth structure, need for re-contour, deficient contact point, infra-occlusion, inadequate anatomy, as well as chipping ( 13 , 20 , 21 ). Recently the restorative dentistry advocates for the minimal invasive philosophy, preferring the repair of partial function restoration than its complete change, aiming to avoid the weakening of the tooth structure by removal of the entire filling with burs ( 21 ). Studies have shown that repairing partially defective composites, instead of replacing them, are often performed( 13 ) and reduces the risks and treatment costs ( 22 ), despite being also well accepted for patients and professionals ( 13 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar results were found by previous researchers ( 25 , 26 ), indicating that it is safe to make repair in this material using both methacrylate adhesives and composites. Even though some studies indicates that the conventional methacrylate composite presents a better bond strength reparability than silorane-based materials repaired with methacrylate resins ( 19 , 21 ). The lower repair potential of silorane resin found by these studies was attributed to the lower reactivity of silorane groups after polymerization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Minimal intervention in dentistry: which is the best approach for silorane composite restoration repairs?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to evaluate surface treatments, adhesives and composites for repairing silorane based restorations. Material and Methods One hundred and twenty truncated cones (2 mm smaller diameter and 4 mm larger diameter) made of silorane composite were divided in 12 groups according with the surface treatment (diamond bur and oxide aluminum abrasion), the adhesive (Adper Scothbond Multipurpose (3M ESPE), Ecusit (Voco) and Filtek P90 Adhesive (3M ESPE)). Each group was subdivided in two according with the composite used for repair (methacrylate and silorane). The repair was made with a second truncated cone build over the first one and bond strength assssed by tensile strength. Data were submitted to ANOVA 3-way and Tukey’s test ( p <0.05). Results There was difference only for the adhesives and the composites, with conventional adhesives (Adper Scothbond Mutipurpose) and methacrylate-based composites (Filtek Z350) presenting superior tensile strength compared to the silorane ones (P90 Adhesive system and composite). Conclusions Therefore, it must be concluded that silorane composite can be repaired with methacrylate base composites and adhesives. Key words: Silorane composites, composites, bond strength, minimal intervention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Minimal intervention in dentistry: which is the best approach for silorane composite restoration repairs?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The clear majority of research studies[ 8 9 10 11 12 ] as well as clinical guidelines, suggest the use of silane coupling agent prior application of the adhesive to increase the bond strength between the aged and the new composite. A chemical interaction takes place between the silica of the composite fillers and silage's functional group of silanol.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of material and surface treatment on composite repair shear bond strength

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of the composite material and surface treatment to the bond strength when repairing an aged composite surface with new composite.Materials and Methods:One hundred and sixty resin blocks of methacrylate composite and silorane composite prepared and aged in artificial saliva for 6 months. Specimens treated either with a diamond bur (DB) or air abrasion (AA), conditioned with orthophosphoric acid (OA) or sodium hypochloride (SH) and repaired with methacrylate or silorane composite using the corresponding adhesive system. Repaired composites underwent thermocycling fatigue (×5000), and bond strength was measured at shear.Results:Methacrylate achieved the highest bond strengths as repair material, in all combinations (26.54-55.56 MPa). Silorane only reached 8.12 MPa when repairing silorane treated with DB and OA. For all other treatment combinations repairing with silorane led to pretest failures. The most susceptible to repair composites/surface treatment combination is when repairing methacrylate treated with AA and SH and methacrylate composite (55.56 MPa).Conclusions:Silorane composites are not suitable to be used when repairing an old composite restoration. The repair material is the most critical factor, while aged surface treatment has only a minor influence to the shear bond strength.

show abstract

“…The effect of the use of a silane solution is problematic. There are on the one hand studies that showed an increase of bond strength by the application of a silane solution (21)(22)(23) and on the other hand studies that showed that the use of a silane solution had no effect or even produced lower bond strengths (19,24). The use of a bonding in composite repair is obligatory (25).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of different standardised bond strength tests and the influence of glycine powder treatment in composite resin repairs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The repair of restorations is an eligible method to extend the survival rates of intraoral restorations. There is a consensus that the old surface has to be removed before repair by the use of a sandblaster or rotating instruments. This study aimed to investigate whether a glycine powder can be used successfully in composite repair by measurement of shear and tensile bond strength according to dental standards. Methodology: The influence of mechanical preparation by no powder, 25 µm glycine powder or 50 µm aluminium-oxide powder and chemical conditioning by the use of bonding, phosphoric acid and bonding or bonding, phosphoric acid and a silane on the repair bond strength of an artificially aged nano-hybrid composite was tested according to the guidelines of DIN 13990 (2017), ISO 29022 (2013) and ISO/TS 11405 (2015). The fracture modes were evaluated by adhesive, cohesive or mixed failures. Results: There was no significant difference in the performance of the different mechanical and chemical treatments. The shear bond test according to DIN 13990 (2017) produces higher repair bond strengths (26.0±8.9 MPa) than the test described in ISO 29022 (17.9±6.3 MPa). The tensile bond strength according to ISO/TS 11405 (6.9±1.8 MPa) was the lowest. Most adhesive failures occurred with the shear test according to ISO 29022 (41%), followed by DIN 13990 (18%) and the tensile test (4%). Conclusion: For evaluating the bond strength of composites the test described in ISO 29022 is recommended, because it produces the highest percentage of adhesive failures. Nano-hybrid-composites are robust to different repair protocols. How to cite this article: Herrmann GP, Reimann S, Daratsianos N, Weber A, Keilig L, Nadal J, Bourauel C. Comparison of different standardized bond strength tests and the influence of glycine powder treatment in composite resin repairs. Int Dent Res 2020;10(1):36-43. https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2020.vol10.no2.2 Linguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.

show abstract

Influence of surface treatments to repair recent fillings of silorane-and methacrylate-based composites

Cited by 15 publications

References 15 publications

Minimal intervention in dentistry: which is the best approach for silorane composite restoration repairs?

Minimal intervention in dentistry: which is the best approach for silorane composite restoration repairs?

Influence of material and surface treatment on composite repair shear bond strength

Comparison of different standardised bond strength tests and the influence of glycine powder treatment in composite resin repairs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About