The shear bond strength of repaired high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with different adhesive systems and resin composite types

Oğlakçı, Burcu; Arhun, Neslıhan

doi:10.1080/01694243.2019.1609643

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Shear bond strength (SBS) is a simple and reliable testing method to investigate bond strength between dissimilar materials, especially when the bonding surface area has an average diameter of 5 mm [ 45 ]. It was frequently used as a method of bonding different materials to zirconia [ 46 , 47 , 48 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Air-Abraded Versus Laser-Fused Fluorapatite Glass-Ceramics on Shear Bond Strength of Repair Materials to Zirconia

Elraggal

Silikas

2021

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zirconia repair could be a feasible alternative option to total replacement in fractured zirconia-based restorations. Maximising the bond strength by enriching zirconia with fluorapatite glass-ceramics (FGC) powder has been addressed and compared to other surface treatments. Besides resin composite, other repair materials have been proposed and compared. Zirconia blocks received different surface treatments (A—sandblasting with tribochemical silica-coated alumina (CoJet). B—sandblasting with FGC powder (FGC), C—fluorapatite glass-ceramic coat+ neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser irradiation (FGC + Nd: YAG), and D—no surface treatment). The surface roughness, topography, and crystallinity were investigated by a profilometer, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses, respectively. For each surface treatment, three repair materials (feldspathic porcelain, lithium disilicate, and resin composite) were bonded to zirconia with 10, Methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP)–Monobond Plus/ Multilink Automix. Bonded specimens were thermocycled for 10,000 cycles and tested for shear bond strength (SBS) at a speed of 1 mm/min, followed by the analysis of the mode of failure. FGC + Nd: YAG laser group reported the highest surface roughness and monoclinic content compared to CoJet, FGC, and control groups. The highest mean SBS was found in FGC-blasted zirconia, followed by FGC + Nd: YAG laser and CoJet treated groups. However, the lowest SBS was found in control groups regardless of the repair material. Sandblasting zirconia with FGC powder increased SBS of resin to zirconia with lower monoclinic phase transformation compared to FGC + Nd: YAG or CoJet groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Air-Abraded Versus Laser-Fused Fluorapatite Glass-Ceramics on Shear Bond Strength of Repair Materials to Zirconia

Elraggal

Silikas

2021

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of the self-etch adhesive in the current study was related to its simplicity of use by eliminating the need for acid conditioning, rinsing, and drying of etched dental substrate and to the theoretical ability to etch and infiltrate simultaneously, thus preventing discrepancies between demineralization and infiltration and less technique sensitivity compared to etch-and-rinse adhesives 23 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Hydro- abrasion versus Conventional Cavity Preparation on the Clinical Performance of Composite Resin Restoration

kashkosh

Genaid

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To evaluate the effect of hydro abrasion versus the conventional drill method of cavity preparation on the clinical performance of composite restoration over one year follow up period. Materials and methods:Twenty patients with occlusal carious lesions were selected and examined with DIAGNO cam and ICDAS visual criteria to select teeth having ICDAS Code 3 or 4. Forty lesions were randomly divided into two groups (n=20) according to the method of caries removal. Cavities were prepared by the conventional drill method in group I and by hydro-abrasion in group II. Cavities of both groups were restored by self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy Bond) and nano-filled composite (Filtek Z350XT). All restorations were evaluated after 24 hours, after 9 and 12 months according to (USPHS) criteria for retention, marginal adaptation, postoperative sensitivity, marginal discoloration, and secondary caries.Results: Mild, moderate -severe and very severe pain was recorded in group I While in group II, only mild pain was recorded in (40%) of cases. The statistical analysis of the collected data related to the tested USPHS criteria revealed 100% Alpha scoring regarding retention, marginal adaptation and secondary caries in both groups throughout the study period. The gap width measured under SEM was found increased sig. by time in both groups. Marginal discoloration was observed in the two groups after nine and 12 months. Post-operative hypersensitivity was found only in group I in 100% of cases at the base line and was disappeared during the next follow up period. Conclusion:Hydro-abrasion could be recommended as a preferred method of cavity preparation in shallow to mild carious lesions compared to the conventional cavity preparation method.

show abstract

“…The minimum repair bond strength required in the repair of restorations can be considered as a minimum of 15 MPa as mentioned in previous studies (Ghavam et al, 2018;Kiomarsi et al, 2017;Oglakci & Arhun, 2019). Thus, it is important to apply the appropriate surface treatment to restoration material while undertaking a repairing procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No clear information about the minimum threshold bonding strength that can be accepted for restoration repair is available (Ghavam, Naeemi, Hashemikamangar, Ebrahimi, & Kharazifard, 2018). The minimum repair bond strength required in the repair of restorations can be considered as a minimum of 15 MPa as mentioned in previous studies (Ghavam et al, 2018; Kiomarsi et al, 2017; Oglakci & Arhun, 2019). Thus, it is important to apply the appropriate surface treatment to restoration material while undertaking a repairing procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin‐ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments

Bayraktar

Arslan

Demirtag

2020

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study intended to compare the repair bond strength of computer-aided design/ computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks consisting of resin and feldspathic ceramics following different surface treatments using the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Ten specimens were prepared with 4 mm height for Vita Enamic (VE), Lava Ultimate (LU), Vita Mark II (VM), and thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55 C). Each material was categorized into one of five subgroups according to following surface treatments: (a) bur grinding (BG), (b) hydrofluoric acid etching (HF), (c) neodymiumdoped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG or NY), (d) erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG or EY), and (e) erbium, chromium-doped yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG or ECY) laser conditioning. After surface treatment procedures, specimens were properly restored to 4 mm high with a micro-hybrid composite resin. Bar specimens (1 × 1 × 8 mm) were obtained using a low-speed cutting machine and then thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55 C). The μTBS was tested at 1 mm/min crosshead speed, and failure modes were evaluated. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. LU-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (32.94 ± 5.80 MPa) compared to LU-laser groups (p < .05). VE-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (22.06 ± 4.26 MPa) compared to other VE groups (p < .05). Among the laser groups, the NY laser produced the lowest (p < .05) μTBS for LU (13.42 ± 3.44 MPa) and VE (2.27 ± 0.85 MPa), while EY showed the highest (p < .05).Laser-treated VM groups were all prefailured. VM-HF produced a higher μTBS (18.73 ± 3.75 MPa) than VM-BG (5.05 ± 1.76 MPa) (p < .05).

show abstract

The shear bond strength of repaired high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with different adhesive systems and resin composite types

Cited by 16 publications

References 48 publications

Effect of Air-Abraded Versus Laser-Fused Fluorapatite Glass-Ceramics on Shear Bond Strength of Repair Materials to Zirconia

Effect of Air-Abraded Versus Laser-Fused Fluorapatite Glass-Ceramics on Shear Bond Strength of Repair Materials to Zirconia

Effect of Hydro- abrasion versus Conventional Cavity Preparation on the Clinical Performance of Composite Resin Restoration

Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin‐ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About