Initial Repair Bond Strength of a Nano‐filled Hybrid Resin: Effect of Surface Treatments and Bonding Agents

Yeşilyurt, Cemal; Kuşgöz, Adem; Bayram, Mehmet; Ülker, Mustafa

doi:10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00271.x

Cited by 74 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…13,[26][27][28] In this study, it was interesting to see quite different results from the two acid etching subgroups. When repaired with Filtek Z250 (group 2M), the 35% phosphoric acid was able to produce microtensile bond strength values comparable to the cohesive strength of the silorane composite.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,10,[14][15][16][17] The bonding of new to aged composite mostly depends on micromechanical interaction, but chemical bonding is also to be taken into consideration. [18][19][20] In a clinical situation, there may be no information about the chemical composition of the existing resin composite restorations. Understanding how to repair existing silorane restorations is critical because there is limited information regarding repair protocols of silorane composite.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Repaired Aged Silorane Resin Composite

Palasuk

Platt

Cho

et al. 2013

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Objective: This laboratory study compared the repaired microtensile bond strengths of aged silorane resin composite using different surface treatments and either silorane or methacrylate resin composite. Methods: One hundred eight silorane resin composite blocks (Filtek LS) were fabricated and aged by thermocycling between 8°C and 48°C (5000 cycles). A control (solid resin composite) and four surface treatment groups (no treatment, acid treatment, aluminum oxide sandblasting, and diamond bur abrasion) were tested (N=12 blocks, 108 beams/group). Each treatment group was randomly divided in half and repaired with either silorane resin composite (LS adhesive) or methacrylate resin composite (Filtek Z250/Single Bond Plus). After 24 hours in 37°C distilled water, microtensile bond strength testing was performed using a non-trimming technique. Surface topography after surface treatment was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Failure mode was examined using optical microscopy (50×). Results: Weibull-distribution survival analysis revealed that aluminum oxide sandblasting followed by silorane or methacrylate resin composite and acid treatment with methacrylate resin composite provided insignificant differences from the control (p>0.05). All other groups were significantly lower than the control. Failure was primarily adhesive in all groups. Conclusion: Aluminum oxide sandblasting produced microtensile bond strength not different from the cohesive strength of silorane resin composite. After aluminum oxide sandblasting, aged silorane resin composite can be repaired with either silorane resin composite with LS system adhesive or methacrylate resin composite with methacrylate dental adhesive.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Repaired Aged Silorane Resin Composite

Palasuk

Platt

Cho

et al. 2013

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers agreed that the bonding of new to old composite is mainly micromechanical, 3,9,28 although chemical bonding cannot be disregarded. 29 There are no available data in the literature on the repair bond strength considered adequate enough to survive in occlusal function. 30 Therefore, many studies 20,30,31 have suggested that the cohesive strength of the intact unrepaired material should be taken into consideration as a control in the evaluation of the repair bond strength.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two-Year Interfacial Bond Durability and Nanoleakage of Repaired Silorane-Based Resin Composite

Mobarak¹,

El-Deeb

2013

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Silane application is not mandatory for repairing silorane-based resin composite, which can be successfully repaired even with different repair adhesive/materials. However, early signs of nanoleakage can be detected. SUMMARYObjectives: To investigate the effect of silane primer application, intermediate adhesive agent/repair composite, and storage period on the interfacial microtensile bond strength (lTBS) of repaired silorane-based resin composite compared with unrepaired composites and on the nanoleakage.Methods: Forty-eight 1-month-old substrate specimens from Filtek P90 were roughened, etched, and distributed over two groups (n=24) based on receiving silane (Clearfil Ceramic Primer) or not. Then, half of the specimens (n=12) were repaired with P90 System Adhesive/Filtek P90 and the other half with Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose adhesive/Filtek Z250 resin composite. Within each repair category, repaired specimens were stored in artificial saliva at 378C for either 24 hours (n=6) or two years before being serially sectioned into sticks (0.6 6 0.01 mm 2 ). From each specimen, two sticks were prepared for nanoleakage determination and four sticks were used for lTBS testing. Additional unrepaired specimens from each composite (n=12) were made to determine the cohesive strength at 24 hours and two years. Mean lTBS were calculated and statistically analyzed. Modes of failure were also determined.Results: General linear model analysis revealed no significant effect for the silane priming, intermediate adhesive agent/repair composite, and storage period or for their interactions on the lTBS values of the repaired specimens. There was no significant difference between the cohesive strength of Filtek P90 and Filtek Z250; both were significantly higher

show abstract

“…Mechanical retention can be provided with some surface treatment modalities, such as roughening the surface with a coarse diamond bur [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19], a rotary cutting instrument [20][21][22][23][24], a sandblasting or air-abrasion system with aluminium oxide powder [11,25], or phosphoric [26] or hydrofluoric acid [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Surface treatment on the fractured surface of composite resin materials must be performed to obtain high bond strength between the materials. Although there is a great deal of information about the effect of several treatment methods on the bonding strength of composite restorations [18,20,27,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42], very limited data are available on the use of surface treatment of CAD/CAM resin-based materials [26,37,[43][44][45][46] to enhance their repair bond strength.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative approach to analyse the effects of different surface treatments on CAD/CAM resin nanoceramics–resin composite repair bond strength

Tınastepe¹,

Türkeş

Kazazoğlu

2017

Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limited data are available on the repair bond strength between computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) resin nanoceramics and composite repair materials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to test the influence of several different surface treatment modalities, intermediate agents and phosphoric acid on the shear bond strength (SBS) of repair composites with water-aged CAD/CAM resin nanoceramics. Three pretreatment and four conditioning methods comprised 12 different groups. A universal testing machine was used to test the SBS. Specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope to determine the fracture mode. The results showed that a combination of the pretreatment and conditioning methods significantly enhanced the SBS of the resin nanoceramic (p:0.001; p < 0.01), while etching with phosphoric acid did not affect the SBS (p:0.841; p > 0.05). This study showed that surface pretreatment in combination with a conditioning method should be used in the repair of CAD/CAM nanoceramics. The highest SBS values were achieved by grinding the surface with a diamond bur followed by silane and adhesive application, whereas the lowest values were obtained in the non-conditioned non-pretreated group.

show abstract

Initial Repair Bond Strength of a Nano‐filled Hybrid Resin: Effect of Surface Treatments and Bonding Agents

Abstract: Surface treatment with a diamond bur plus a proper adhesive agent is a simple, efficient, and cost-effective procedure for enhancing the shear bond strength of a repaired nano-hybrid resin composite.

Cited by 74 publications

References 26 publications

Effect of Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Repaired Aged Silorane Resin Composite

Effect of Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Repaired Aged Silorane Resin Composite

Two-Year Interfacial Bond Durability and Nanoleakage of Repaired Silorane-Based Resin Composite

Comparative approach to analyse the effects of different surface treatments on CAD/CAM resin nanoceramics–resin composite repair bond strength

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About