Adhesion of substrate–adherent combinations for early composite repairs: Effect of intermediate adhesive resin application
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This study evaluated the effect of intermediate adhesive resin application (IAR) on tensile bond strength (TBS) for early composite repairs in situations where substrate and repair composite bonded together were once of the same kind with the substrate (similar) and once other than the substrate material (dissimilar). Specimens from three types of composites (TPH Spectrum (TPH), Charisma (CHA) and Filtek Z250 (Z250)) were fabricated. The specimens in each composite group (n=72) were randomly divided into six subgroups (n=12). In each composite group, the similar and two dissimilar composites were bonded onto the substrates once using an IAR (Adper Single Bond Plus) and once without. After water storage for 1 week at 37 °C, substrate–adherent combinations were submitted to tensile test. Data were analyzed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α=0.05). The substrate–adherent combination (p=0.0001), adherent (repair) composite (p=0.0001), and application of IAR (p=0.0001) significantly affected the results. Utilization of IAR improved the repair bond strength for all composite combinations.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Research and COVID-19
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00093-9 ↗
2. Survival rate of sealed, refurbished and repaired defective restorations: 4-year follow-up10.1590/S0103-64402011000200008 ↗
3. Resin composite restorative materials10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01296.x ↗
4. Repair versus replacement of defective composite restorations in dental schools in Germany
5. The repair of direct composite restorations: an international survey of the teaching of operative techniques and materials10.1034/j.1600-0579.2003.00275.x ↗
6. Age-related changes in the immunoreactivity of the monocyte/macrophage system in rat molar pulp after cavity preparation10.1067/moe.2002.124577 ↗
7. Variables influencing the repair strength of dental composites
8. Immediate repair bond strengths of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites after different surface treatments10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.009 ↗
9. Repair of silorane composite-Using the same substrate or a methacrylate-based composite?10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.008 ↗
10. Tensile bond strength of an aged resin composite repaired with different protocols
11. Adhesion of resin composite to hydrofluoric acid-exposed enamel and dentin in repair protocols10.2341/10-312-L ↗
12. Bond strengths of repaired composite resins
13. Repair of an aged, contaminated indirect composite resin with a direct, visible-light-cured composite resin
14. Bond strength of repaired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00044-4 ↗
15. Effect of different surface treatments on the composite–composite repair bond strength10.1007/s00784-008-0228-2 ↗
16. Effect of different surface treatments on the repair strength of a nanofilled resin-based composite10.4012/dmj.2010-202 ↗
17. The effect of oxygen inhibition on an unfilled/filled composite system10.1177/00220345900690100501 ↗
18. Effect of oxygen inhibition on composite repair strength over time10.1002/jbm.b.30689 ↗
19. Oxygen inhibition and incremental layer bond strengths of resin composites10.1016/j.dental.2009.06.003 ↗
20. Is there one optimal repair technique for all composites?10.1016/j.dental.2011.03.013 ↗
21. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70224-5 ↗
22. Effect of physicochemical aging conditions on the composite–composite repair bond strength
23. Dentine desensitization induced by prophylactic and air-polishing procedures: an in vitro dentine permeability and confocal microscopy study10.1016/j.jdent.2010.01.010 ↗
24. A critique of bond strength measurements10.1016/0300-5712(89)90131-0 ↗
25. Shear vs. tensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to ceramic10.1177/00220345950740091401 ↗
26. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.007 ↗
27. Tensile bond strength of immediately repaired anterior microfine hybrid restorative composite using nontrimmed hourglass specimens
28. Bonding of composite to water aged composite with surface treatments10.1016/j.dental.2006.03.010 ↗
29. Bonding of restorative and veneering composite resin to some polymeric composites10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00064-6 ↗
30. Repairability of cross-linked biopolymers10.1177/0022034508329703 ↗
31. The effect of filler loading and morphology on the mechanical properties of contemporary composites10.1067/mpr.2002.125179 ↗
32. Hygroscopic expansion of a compomer and a composite on artificial gap reduction10.1016/S0300-5712(01)00053-7 ↗
33. Shear bond strength of repaired composite resins using a hybrid composite resin
34. Surface treatment techniques for resin composite repair
35. Relevance of in vitro tests of adhesive and composite dental materials. A review in 3 parts. Part 3: in vitro tests of adhesive systems