Composite–composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers

Tezvergıl, Arzu; Lassila, Lippo; Vallittu, Pekka K.

doi:10.1016/s0300-5712(03)00093-9

Cited by 142 publications

(155 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Restorations typically fail after being aged in a humid oral environment. Aging conditions may cause some alterations on the surfaces of restorative materials 32,33) . For this reason, restoration aging should be considered and included in the planning of restoration repair 32) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the microretentive surface structure created by grinding increased the surface area. Accordingly, surface wettability after primer application was enhanced before unfilled adhesive resin was added 33) . Compared with the control and CR groups, CS repair system resulted in improved bond strength of GS resin composite to VE CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic (Table 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems

Elsaka

2015

Dent. Mater. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the repair bond strength of a nanohybrid resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic based on four intraoral ceramic repair systems. Vita Enamic (VE) CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic was used in this study. Specimens were divided into five test groups according to the repair method performed on the ceramic surface: Gr C (No treatment; control); Gr CZ (Cimara Zircon); Gr PR (Porcelain Repair); Gr CR (Clearfil Repair); and Gr CS (CoJet system). Nanohybrid resin composite (GrandioSO) was packed onto treated ceramic surfaces for adhesion testing using microtensile bond strength test. Debonded specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope and SEM to determine the fracture mode. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test. PR and CZ repair systems significantly enhanced the bond strength of nanohybrid resin composite to VE CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic when compared with the other tested repair systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems

Elsaka

2015

Dent. Mater. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although promising results were obtained in these earlier studies, the tests were often performed on aged composite [1][2][3][4][5][6] or fresh composite light-cured in contact with a mylar strip or a glass plate. [7][8][9][10][11] After polishing an esthetic composite restoration, the under-contour of some regions may be highlighted, thus requiring an immediate or one-week later repair.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Durability of Surface Treatments and Intermediate Agents Used for Repair of a Polished Composite

Costa¹,

Ferreira²,

Klein-Júnior³

et al. 2010

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With PFC laminates, the other advantages include relatively low cost, inherently less brittle compared to ceramics, and to a certain extent easy to repair. However, major drawbacks include low mechanical properties [6][7][8] and difficulty in bonding to highly crosslinked polymer structures 9) . On reinforcing PFC laminates to augment their mechanical properties, attention has shifted towards fiber-reinforced composites (FRCs).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of fiber-reinforced composites on the failure load and failure mode of composite veneers

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared the initial and final failure loads and failure modes of indirect resin composite laminate veneers with and without fiber reinforcement. Forty intact lower canines received standard laminate preparations and were randomly assigned into four test groups (n=10). In Group 1, indirect resin composite veneers were repaired with two layers of preimpregnated bidirectional glass fiber weave and a restorative composite; in Group 2, with a layer of preimpregnated unidirectional glass fibers and a restorative composite; and in Group 3, with an experimental semi-IPN matrix composed of multidirectional short glass fibers. Indirect resin composite veneers without any fiber reinforcement were used as control (Group 4). All specimens were thermocycled and tested with a universal testing machine. On the final failure load, there were no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) among the test groups. Within each group, pairwise comparison of initial and final failure loads revealed statistically significant differences (p<0.05), except for Group 4 (p>0.05). On failure mode, unreinforced specimens showed instantaneous failure, whereas reinforced specimens mostly demonstrated elongated failure.

show abstract

Composite–composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers

Cited by 142 publications

References 7 publications

Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems

Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems

Durability of Surface Treatments and Intermediate Agents Used for Repair of a Polished Composite

Effect of fiber-reinforced composites on the failure load and failure mode of composite veneers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About