The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제9권1호
  • /
  • Pages.38-44
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Microtensile bond strength of repaired indirect resin composite

  • 투고 : 2016.05.16
  • 심사 : 2016.11.17
  • 발행 : 2017.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of surface treatments on microtensile bond strengths (MTBSs) of two types of indirect resin composites bonded to a conventional direct resin composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Indirect resin composite blocks of Ceramage and SR Nexco were prepared in a plastic mold having a dimension of $10{\times}10{\times}4\;mm$. These composite blocks were divided into three groups according to their surface treatments: Group1: Sandblast (SB); Group2: Sandblast and ultrasonically clean (SB+UL); Group3: Sandblast plus silane (SB+SI). After bonding with direct resin composite, indirect-direct resin composite blocks were kept in distilled water for 24 hours at $37^{\circ}C$ and cut into microbars with the dimension of $1{\times}1{\times}8\;mm$. Microbar specimens (n = 40 per group) were loaded using a universal testing machine. Failure modes and compositions were evaluated by SEM. The statistical analyses of MTBS were performed by two-way ANOVA and Dunnett's test at ${\alpha}=.05$. RESULTS. Surface treatments and brands had effects on the MTBS without an interaction between these two factors. For SR Nexco, the MTBSs of SB and SB+SI group were significantly higher than that of SB+UL. For Ceramage, the MTBSs of SB and SB+SI were significantly higher than that of SB+UL. The mean MTBS of the Ceramage specimens was significantly higher than that of SR Nexco for all surface treatments. CONCLUSION. Sandblasting with or without silane application could improve the bond strengths of repaired indirect resin composites to a conventional direct resin composite.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Nandini S. Indirect resin composites. J Conserv Dent 2010; 13:184-94. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.73377
  2. Miara P. Aesthetic guidelines for second-generation indirect inlay and onlay composite restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998;10:423-31.
  3. Dietschi D, Scampa U, Campanile G, Holz J. Marginal adaptation and seal of direct and indirect Class II composite resin restorations: an in vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int 1995;26: 127-38.
  4. Touati B. The evolution of aesthetic restorative materials for inlays and onlays: a review. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1996;8:657-66.
  5. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:45-64.
  6. Touati B, Aidan N. Second generation laboratory composite resins for indirect restorations. J Esthet Dent 1997;9:108-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1997.tb00928.x
  7. Soares CJ, Martins LR, Pfeifer JM, Giannini M. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with indirect-composite and ceramic inlay systems. Quintessence Int 2004;35:281-6.
  8. Soares CJ, Santana FR, Fonseca RB, Martins LR, Neto FH. In vitro analysis of the radiodensity of indirect composites and ceramic inlay systems and its influence on the detection of cement overhangs. Clin Oral Investig 2007;11:331-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-007-0130-3
  9. Hirata M, Koizumi H, Tanoue N, Ogino T, Murakami M, Matsumura H. Influence of laboratory light sources on the wear characteristics of indirect composites. Dent Mater J 2011;30:127-35. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2010-043
  10. Dall'oca S, Papacchini F, Radovic I, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Repair potential of a laboratory-processed nano-hybrid resin composite. J Oral Sci 2008;50:403-12. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.50.403
  11. Cesar PF, Meyer Faara PM, Miwa Caldart R, Gastaldoni Jaeger R, da Cunha Ribeiro F. Tensile bond strength of composite repairs on Artglass using different surface treatments. Am J Dent 2001;14:373-7.
  12. Lung CY, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: an overview. Dent Mater 2012;28:467-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.02.009
  13. Passos SP, Ozcan M, Vanderlei AD, Leite FP, Kimpara ET, Bottino MA. Bond strength durability of direct and indirect composite systems following surface conditioning for repair. J Adhes Dent 2007;9:443-7.
  14. Hummel SK, Marker V, Pace L, Goldfogle M. Surface treatment of indirect resin composite surfaces before cementation. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:568-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70096-9
  15. Loomans BA, Cardoso MV, Roeters FJ, Opdam NJ, De Munck J, Huysmans MC, Van Meerbeek B. Is there one optimal repair technique for all composites? Dent Mater 2011;27: 701-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.03.013
  16. Lucena-Martin C, Gonzalez-Lopez S, Navajas-Rodriguez de Mondelo JM. The effect of various surface treatments and bonding agents on the repaired strength of heat-treated composites. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:481-8. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.116775
  17. Trajtenberg CP, Powers JM. Bond strengths of repaired laboratory composites using three surface treatments and three primers. Am J Dent 2004;17:123-6.
  18. 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;25:442-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.09.009
  19. Brosh T, Pilo R, Bichacho N, Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77: 122-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70224-5
  20. 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. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572004000100009
  21. Souza EM, Francischone CE, Powers JM, Rached RN, Vieira S. Effect of different surface treatments on the repair bond strength of indirect composites. Am J Dent 2008;21:93-6.
  22. Swift EJ Jr, Cloe BC, Boyer DB. Effect of a silane coupling agent on composite repair strengths. Am J Dent 1994;7:200-2.
  23. Martos J, Osinaga PWR, de Oliveira E, de Castro LAS. Hydrolytic degradation of composite resins: effects on the microhardness. Mater Res 2003;6:599-604. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-14392003000400029
  24. Furuse AY, da Cunha LF, Benetti AR, Mondelli J. Bond strength of resin-resin interfaces contaminated with saliva and submitted to different surface treatments. J Appl Oral Sci 2007;15:501-5. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572007000600009
  25. Berger SB, Palialol AR, Cavalli V, Giannini M. Characterization of water sorption, solubility and filler particles of light-cured composite resins. Braz Dent J 2009;20:314-8. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402009000400009

피인용 문헌

  1. The effect of elapsed time following alumina blasting on adhesion of CAD/CAM resin block to dentin pp.1881-1361, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2018-113
  2. 복합레진 인레이의 표면처리방법에 따른 표면특성 비교 vol.19, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.13065/jksdh.20190017
  3. Adhesion of Denture Characterizing Composites to Heat‐Cured, CAD/CAM and 3D Printed Denture Base Resins vol.30, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13291