The Effect of Mechanical Alteration on Repair Bond Strength of S-PRG-Filler-Based Resin Composite Materials

This study investigates the impact of mechanical alteration on resin composite surfaces and its subsequent effect on repair bond strength. A total of 100 resin composite disks were prepared and were allocated for 24 h or 1 year of artificial aging. Specimens were embedded in epoxy resin, and the composite surfaces were mechanically altered using either diamond burs or air abrasion with aluminum oxide or glass beads. A universal bonding material was applied and a 2 mm circular and 3 mm high repair composite cylinder were prepared using a Teflon mold. Then, the specimens were tested for their shear bond strength, and the de-bonded specimens were observed under a scanning electron microscope to determine the failure pattern. SPSS 26.0 statistical software was used to analyze the data. Two-way ANOVA showed a statistically significant effect of mechanical alteration and aging on the shear bond strength of S-PRG-filler-based resin composite (p < 0.05). Surface modification with a fine diamond bur showed a significantly higher bond strength in both 24-h- and 1-year-aged specimens. Surface modification with alumina significantly increased the bond strength of 1-year-aged specimens; however, it was statistically insignificant for 24 h-aged specimens. Mechanical alteration with a fine diamond bur and 50-micron alumina can improve the repair bond strength of the composite.

Surface treatments on repair bond strength of aged resin composites

Aims:

The aim was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the repair shear bond strength of aged resin composites.

Materials and Methods:

Forty cylindrical-shaped specimens were treated from each material: Tetric Evo Ceram, Neo Spectra, and Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative and allocated into four groups according to the surface treatment planned to use: Group 1: diamond, Group 2: silica coating, Group 3: carbide burs, and Group 4: control group. Following the surface treatment, composites were repaired with flowable resins. The shear bond strength was tested using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The fracture mode was assessed under 50× magnification. The data were analyzed statistically using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test followed by a one-way ANOVA test. Multiple comparison procedures were performed using Tukey’s test. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results:

The lowest mean value of the shear bond strength was for the Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative in the control group, whereas the highest mean value was in the silica group. Silica and carbide groups had significantly higher mean values of the shear bond strength than diamond and control groups in Tetric EvoCeram and Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative. In contrast, in Neo Spectra St HV, the carbide group had a higher mean value but was not statistically significant.

Conclusion:

Combinations of mechanical and chemical retentive systems enhance the shear bond strength of the repair composite to the aged composite. Among the different surface treatments employed in this study, silica and carbide groups show higher repair bond strength of new composite to aged composite.

Adhesive system affects repair bond strength of resin composite

Purpose:

This study evaluated the effects of different adhesive systems on repair bond strength of aged resin composites.

Materials and Methods:

Ninety composite discs were built and half of them were subjected to thermal aging. Aged and non-aged specimens were repaired with resin composite using three different adhesive systems; a two-step self-etch adhesive, a two-step total-etch adhesive and a one-step self-etch adhesive; then they were subjected to shear forces. Data were analyzed statistically.

Results:

Adhesive type and aging significantly affected the repair bond strengths (p<0.0001). No statistical difference was found in aged composite groups repaired with two-step self- etch or two-step total-etch adhesive. One-step self-etch adhesive showed lower bond strength values in aged composite repair (p<0.0001).

Conclusion:

In the repair of aged resin composite, two-step self-etch and two-step total-etch adhesives exhibited higher shear bond strength values than that of one-step self-etch adhesive.

Microtensile bond strength of repaired indirect resin composite

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 × 10 × 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℃ and cut into microbars with the dimension of 1 × 1 × 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 α = .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.

Repair Bond Strength of Aged Resin Composite after Different Surface and Bonding Treatments

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of different mechanical surface treatments and chemical bonding protocols on the tensile bond strength (TBS) of aged composite. Bar specimens were produced using a nanohybrid resin composite and aged in distilled water for 30 days. Different surface treatments (diamond bur, phosphoric acid, silane, and sandblasting with Al₂O₃ or CoJet Sand), as well as bonding protocols (Primer/Adhesive) were used prior to application of the repair composite. TBS of the specimens was measured and the results were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Student-Newman-Keuls test (α = 0.05). Mechanically treated surfaces were characterized under SEM and by profilometry. The effect of water aging on the degree of conversion was measured by means of FTIR-ATR spectroscopy. An important increase in the degree of conversion was observed after aging. No significant differences in TBS were observed among the mechanical surface treatments, despite variations in surface roughness profiles. Phosphoric acid etching significantly improved repair bond strength values. The cohesive TBS of the material was only reached using resin bonding agents. Application of an intermediate bonding system plays a key role in achieving reliable repair bond strengths, whereas the kind of mechanical surface treatment appears to play a secondary role.

Effect of Different Surface Treatments and Adhesives on Repair Bond Strength of Resin Composites After One and 12 Months of Storage Using an Improved Microtensile Test Method

Objectives

To evaluate the effect of surface treatments and bonding systems on the repair bond strength between composite materials after one and 12 months of storage, using an improved microtensile test method.

Methods

A total of 72 composite cylinders (Tetric Evo Ceram, Ivoclar) were fabricated, stored in distilled water for two weeks followed by thermal cycling (5000 times between 5°C and 55°C), and served as substrate. The cylinders were mechanically roughened using 320-grit silicon carbide sandpaper, etched with 37% phosphoric acid gel, rinsed with water, and divided equally into three experimental groups: group 1, unchanged surface; group 2, sandblasting of the surface (CoJet tribochemical silica sand, 3M ESPE; Microetcher II, Danville Engineering Inc); and group 3, surface silane coating (Bis-Silane, BISCO Inc). Eight control cylinders were prepared and underwent similar aging as the substrate. Each experimental group was divided into subgroups that received the following bonding systems: one-step self-etching adhesive (AdheSE One, Ivoclar Vivadent), two-step self-etching adhesive (Clearfil SE, Kuraray America), and three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Adper Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, 3M ESPE). Fresh composite (Tetric Evo Ceram, Ivoclar) was placed and cured on top of the prepared substrate cylinders. The specimens were placed in distilled water for a week and thermocycled the same way as before. Eight composite control cylinders were also stored and thermocycled for the same period of time. Half of the cylinders in each test group were tested at one month and the second half at 12 months. The cylinders were serially sectioned in an automatic cutting machine, producing 10 to 20 1.1 × 1.1-mm test specimen beam from each cylinder. Specimens were prepared for microtensile testing and the tensile strength calculated based on the force at fracture and specimen dimension. The fracture surfaces were examined under a stereomicroscope and the type of fracture noted.

Results

The mean tensile strength of composite control was 54.5 ± 6.0 MPa at one month and 49.6 ± 5.1 MPa at 12 months. The mean tensile strength for the repaired groups ranged from 26.4 ± 6.8 MPa to 49.9 ± 10.4 MPa at one month and 21.2 ± 9.9 to 41.3 ± 7.5 at 12 months. There was a statistical difference between all groups (p&lt;0.05) at one month. This difference was less pronounced at 12 months. The highest repair strength was obtained in the group having a silane-coated surface and Clearfil, the two-step self-etching adhesive. Clearfil also had the highest repair strength within each surface treatment group. There was a tendency for lower tensile strength at 12 months compared with one month. Most fractures were of the adhesive type; the highest number of cohesive fractures, 16% at one month and 12% at 12 months, were in groups with the highest tensile strength.

Conclusion

The best repair bond strength was achieved by using freshly mixed silane solution on the substrate in addition to an adhesive, rendering a thin bonding layer.

Durability of composite repair using different surface treatments

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the surface treatment and hydrophilicity of the bonding agent on the composite repair strength (RS), silver nitrate uptake (SNU), surface roughness (SR) and estimation of surface area (SA).

METHODS

Fifty resin blocks (Opallis, FGM) were polished and divided in 5 groups: no treatment (NT); roughening with a fine (FDB); medium (MDB); coarse-grit (CDB) and 50-μm aluminium oxide sandblasting (AO). A hydrophobic (Adhesive, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus, 3M ESPE) or hydrophilic (Adper Single Bond 2, 3M ESPE) adhesive was applied, followed by composite placement (Opallis, FGM). Composite-composite bonded sticks (0.9 mm2) were tested in tension (1.0mm/min) immediately [IM] or after 6 months [6M] of water storage. Two sticks from each tooth, at each time, were immersed in a 50% silver nitrate solution and evaluated by SEM. A profilometer was used to measure SR. SEM images were used to estimate the SA using the Image J software. Data were analysed by ANOVA and Tukey's tests.

RESULTS

The AO showed the highest CR strength for both adhesives, whilst the NT group showed the lowest, irrespective of the storage period. The diamond burs had intermediate performance. Silver nitrate deposits were seen after 6M for the hydrophilic adhesive. The ranking of SR values (Ra) from the lowest to the highest was: NT<FDB<MDB<AO≤CDB. A higher SA was produced by AO treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The AO treatment provides the highest CR strength likely due to the high SA produced. The bonding agent did not seem to affect the CR strength after 6M, although early signs of degradation were detected for the hydrophilic system.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Polished composite should be preferred roughened with aluminium oxide followed by the application of a hydrophobic intermediate agent before composite repair.

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

In order to reach high composite repair strength, it is advisable to sandblast the polished composite surface with aluminum oxide. A hydrophobic intermediate agent should then be applied in order to prolong durability of the composite repair.