Effect of water aging on the shear bond strength of different self-adhesive restorative materials to dentin
Source abstract
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of water aging on the shear bond strength of four self-adhesive restorative materials on dentin. Sixty permanent human molars recently extracted for prophylactic purposes were used in this study. The crown of each tooth was cut under water-cooled conditions using a plaster cutting engine to expose the middle dentin surface of the teeth. The prepared teeth were randomly divided into six groups according to the restorative materials [KERR Vertise Flow (VF), GC EQUIA Forte (EQ), PENTRON Fusio Liquid Dentin (PF), IMICRYL Nova Compo SF (NC) Clearfil Majesty ES-2 (CM-control) and Clearfil Majesty ES Flow (CF-control)]. Each restorative material was applied to two different areas of each tooth (n = 120) using cylindrical silicone molds with dimensions of 2 mm × 2 mm. Macro-shear tests were conducted using a Universal Testing Machine (1 mm/min) initially (24 h) and after aging (6 months of water aging), and the failure types were analyzed. For the initial values, a significant difference in the shear bond strength of the self-adhesive and control groups was observed. After aging, the bond strength increased for flowable composite material (CF) and decreased for two different self-adhesive restorative material groups (NC and EQ). There was no significant difference in the bond strength before and aging in the paste-like control composite group (CM) and in the two self-adhesive restorative material groups (VF and PF). Differences in the shear bond strength were observed between the self-adhesive and control materials both before and after aging.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Erosion and Treatment · Dental Research and COVID-19
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
DDS, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Ankara University, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
DDS, PhD, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Ankara University, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Ravi RK, Alla RK, Shammas M, et al. Dental composites-A versatile restorative material: an overview. Indian J Dent Sci. 2013;5(5):111–115.
2. 10.1016/j.cden.2007.02.00110.1016/j.cden.2007.02.001 ↗
3. 10.1177/0022034584063012110110.1177/00220345840630121101 ↗
4. Arhun N. Adezyon ve Adeziv Sistemler. Turkiye Klinikleri J Restor Dent-Special Topics. 2017;3(3):113–127.
5. 10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00084-110.1016/S0109-5641(00)00084-1 ↗
6. 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.000910.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0009 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.04.04410.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.04.044 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.00910.1016/j.dental.2007.02.009 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.dental.2007.12.00310.1016/j.dental.2007.12.003 ↗
10. 10.1177/15440591030820021210.1177/154405910308200212 ↗
11. Abdalla AI, et al. Influence of thermal and mechanical load cycling on the microtensile bond strength of self-etching adhesives. Am J Dent. 2007;20(4):250.
12. 10.2341/07-3010.2341/07-30 ↗
13. 10.1007/s00784-012-0729-x10.1007/s00784-012-0729-x ↗
14. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.02.02010.1016/j.prosdent.2021.02.020 ↗
15. Meerbeek BV, et al. From buonocore’s pioneering acid-etch technique to self-adhering restoratives. A status perspective of rapidly advancing dental adhesive technology. J Adhes Dent. 2020;22(1):7–34.
16. 10.2341/16-095-L10.2341/16-095-L ↗
17. 10.3390/jfb703001610.3390/jfb7030016 ↗
18. Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM. Craig’s restorative dental materials-e-book. 2012. Elsevier Health Sciences, Elsevier India.
19. 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.15010.1016/j.dental.2009.11.150 ↗
20. 10.1016/0109-5641(95)80046-810.1016/0109-5641(95)80046-8 ↗
21. ISO, I., TS 11405: dental materials—testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization ISO Central Secretariat, 2003.
22. 10.2341/15-163-L10.2341/15-163-L ↗
23. 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.09.01010.1016/j.jdent.2014.09.010 ↗
24. 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2012.00531.x10.1111/j.1708-8240.2012.00531.x ↗
25. 10.1016/j.dental.2008.09.00210.1016/j.dental.2008.09.002 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.04210.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.042 ↗
27. 10.1055/s-0040-172190610.1055/s-0040-1721906 ↗
28. 10.1111/jopr.1236510.1111/jopr.12365 ↗
29. 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00744.x10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00744.x ↗
30. 10.1002/jbm.b.3153510.1002/jbm.b.31535 ↗
31. 10.1177/002203451243737510.1177/0022034512437375 ↗
32. 10.3390/ma1421669410.3390/ma14216694 ↗
33. 10.1007/s10266-017-0324-310.1007/s10266-017-0324-3 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.jds.2016.08.00310.1016/j.jds.2016.08.003 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.dental.2012.10.00110.1016/j.dental.2012.10.001 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.00210.1016/j.dental.2004.03.002 ↗
37. Goracci C, Cury AH, Cantoro A, et al. Microtensile bond strength and interfacial properties of self-etching and self-adhesive resin cements used to lute composite onlays under different seating forces. J Adhes Dent. 2006;8(5):327–335.
38. 10.1016/j.sdentj.2014.11.00610.1016/j.sdentj.2014.11.006 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.dental.2016.11.01010.1016/j.dental.2016.11.010 ↗
40. 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-237010.5005/jp-journals-10005-2370 ↗
41. 10.1007/s00056-014-0231-y10.1007/s00056-014-0231-y ↗
42. Yuan H, Li M, Guo B, et al. Evaluation of microtensile bond strength and microleakage of a self-adhering flowable composite. J Adhes Dent. 2015;17(6):535–543.