In Vitro Effects of Different Surface Preparation Techniques on Shear Bond Strength of Direct to Indirect Composite Resin
Journal of Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences,
Vol. 32 No. 2 (2014),
13 Esfand 2019
,
Page 96-102
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v32i2.24803
Abstract
Objective: Repair of an indirect restoration is usually preferred over its replacement. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of silane in different surface preparation techniques on the bond strength of direct to indirect composite resin.
Methods: For this in vitro experimental study, 48 indirect composite cubes were fabricated, divided into 4 groups of 12 and subjected to the following preparation techniques: Group 1. Sandblasting with 50μaluminum oxide particles (SB), Group 2. Sandblasting+ silanization (SB+Sil), Group 3. Etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric (HF) acid, Group 4. Etching with 9.5% HF acid+ silanization (HF+Sil). Before the restoration process, specimens were subjected to 500 thermal cycles and received surface preparations. Single Bond adhesive was applied to the surface in all groups. Specimens were restored with direct composite resin and stored in an incubator at 37°C for 24h. Fracture was induced in the specimens by an Instron machine and the shear bond strength was measured. Data were converted to mega Pascal and analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc.
Results: The highest shear bond strength was 13.85 (2.75) MPa and belonged to group 1; while the lowest bond strength was 8.43 (1.35) MPa and observed in group 2.
Conclusion: Based on the obtained results, composite surface preparation by sandblasting yields more favorable results than HF acid etching and application of silane can also increase the bond strength.
- Dentin bonding agents
- Shear bond strength
- Silane
- Stress
- Surface preparation
How to Cite
References
Soares CJ, Giannini M, Oliveira MT, Paulillo LA, Martins LR. Effect of surface treatments of laboratory-fabricated composites on the microtensile bond strength to a luting resin cement. J Appl Oral Sci 2004; 12: 45-50.
Moezizadeh M, Ansari ZJ, Fard FM. Effect of surface treatment on micro shear bond strength of two indirect composites. J Conserv Dent 2012; 15: 228-232.
Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, Della Bona A. Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 442-451.
Melo MA, Moysés MR, Santos SG, Alcântara CE, Ribeiro JC. Effects of different surface treatments and accelerated artificial aging on the bond strength of composite resin repairs. Braz Oral Res 2011; 25: 143-149.
D’Arcangelo C, Vaninib L. Effect of Three Surface Treatments on the Adhesive Properties of Indirect Composite Restorations. J Adhes Dent 2007; 9: 319-326.
Bonstein T, Garlapo D, Donarummo J Jr, Bush PJ. Evaluation of varied repair protocols applied to aged composit resin. J Adhes Dent 2005; 7: 41-49.
Ikeda M, Nikaido T, Foxton RM, Tagami J.Shear bond strengths of indirect resin composites to hybrid ceramic.Dent Mater J 2005; 24: 238-243.
Trajtenberg CP, Powers JM. Bond strengths of repaired laboratory composites using three surface treatments and three primers.Am J Dent 2004; 17: 123-126.
Özel Bektas Ö, Eren D, Herguner Siso S, Akin GE. Effect of thermocycling on the bond strength of composite resin to bur and laser treated composite resin. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27: 723-728.
Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, Della Bona A. Infeluence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 82-84.
Dall'Oca S, Papacchini F, Goracci C, Cury AH, Suh BI, Tay FR, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Effect of oxygen inhibition on composite repair strength over time. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2007; 81: 493-498.
Browne RM, Tobias RS. Microbial microleakage and pulpal inflammation: a review. Endod Dent Traumatol 1986; 2: 177-183.
Kallio TT, Lastumäki TM, Vallittu PK. Bonding of restorative and veneering composite resin to some polymeric composites. Dent Mater 2001; 17: 80-86.
Shahdad SA, Kennedy JG. Bond strength of repaired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study. J Dent 1998; 26: 685-694.
Cho SD, Rajitrangson P, Matis B, Platt JA. Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser, air abrasion, and silane application on repaired shear bond strength of composites. Oper Dent 2013; 38: E1-9.
Dos Santos PA, Garcia PP, Palma-Dibb RG. Shear bond strength of adhesive systems to enamel and dentin. Thermocycling influence. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2005; 16: 727-732.
Filho AM, Vieira LC, Araújo E, Monteiro Júnior S. Effect of different ceramic surface treatments on resin microtensile bond strength. J Prosthodont 2004; 13: 28-35.
Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M, Koliniotou-Kubia E, Dionyssopoulos P. The effect of thermal cycling on the bovine dentine shear bond strength of current adhesive systems. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 911-917.
Dias AA, Barceleiro MO, Mussel RL, Sampaio-Filho HR. Flexural bond strength of repaired composite resin restorations: influence of surface treatments and aging. Gen Dent 2011; 59: e82- 86.
Bouschlicher MR, Cobb DS, Vargas MA. Effect of two abrasive systems on resin bonding to laboratory-processed indirect resin composite restorations. J Esthet Dent 1999; 11: 185-196.
Pontes AP, Oshima HM, Pacheco JF, Martins JL, Shinkai RS. Shear bond strength of direct composite repairs in indirect composite systems. Gen Dent 2005; 53: 343-347.
Ozcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GA, Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 1276-1282.
Celik EU, Ergücü Z, Türkün LS, Ercan UK. Tensile bond strength of an aged resin composite repaired with different protocols. J Adhes Dent 2011; 13: 359-366.
- Abstract Viewed: 92 times
- PDF Downloaded: 45 times