•  
  •  
 

Corresponding Author

Dina A. Omar

Article Type

Original Article

Section/Category

Restorative Dentistry

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effect of water storage on repair bond strength (RBS) of resin composite to five restorative materials using either a silane and a bonding agent or a universal bond. Materials and Methods: Five materials which are amalgam, direct composite, indirect composite, hybrid ceramic, and feldspathic ceramic were used in this study. Twenty- eight cube-shaped specimens from each material were fabricated, all specimens were sandblasted (Al2O3; 50 µm) and then classified into two equal groups (n=14) according to the surface treatment method (total-etch bond and silane coupling agent or universal bond). Each group was further divided into 2 sub-groups (n=7) according to storage time before shear testing (24 h or 3 months). The nano-hybrid composite was used as a repair material. The RBS was measured by a SBS test, and RBS values were statistically analyzed. Results: After 24h, the RBS values between the five restorative materials ranged from 3.1 ± 0.9 to 22.9 ± 3.6 with silane bond pre-treatment and from 4.5 ± 0.6 to 20.6 ± 2.2 with universal bond pre-treatment. After three months, the RBS values ranged from 4.03 ± 1.1 to 19.003 ± 2.7 for silane and from 2.1 ± 0.9 to 19.3 ± 1.3 for universal bond pre-treatment. Conclusions: Composite, indirect composite, and hybrid ceramic have better results than amalgam and porcelain. The use of a silane and a bonding agent seems more effective for repairing restorations than the universal adhesive system.

Keywords

composite, aging, Adhesion, Repair, SandblastingObjective: To investigate the effect of water storage on repair bond strength (RBS) of resin composite to five restorative materials using either a silane and a bonding agent or a universal bond. Materials and Methods: Five materials which are amalgam, direct composite, indirect composite, hybrid ceramic, and feldspathic ceramic were used in this study. Twenty- eight cube-shaped specimens from each material were fabricated, all specimens were sandblasted (Al2O3; 50 µm) and then classified into two equal groups (n=14) according to the surface treatment method (total-etch bond and silane coupling agent or universal bond). Each group was further divided into 2 sub-groups (n=7) according to storage time before shear testing (24 h or 3 months). The nano-hybrid composite was used as a repair material. The RBS was measured by a SBS test, and RBS values were statistically analyzed. Results: After 24h, the RBS values between the five restorative materials ranged from 3.1 ± 0.9 to 22.9 ± 3.6 with silane bond pre-treatment and from 4.5 ± 0.6 to 20.6 ± 2.2 with universal bond pre-treatment. After three months, the RBS values ranged from 4.03 ± 1.1 to 19.003 ± 2.7 for silane and from 2.1 ± 0.9 to 19.3 ± 1.3 for universal bond pre-treatment. Conclusions: Composite, indirect composite, and hybrid ceramic have better results than amalgam and porcelain. The use of a silane and a bonding agent seems more effective for repairing restorations than the universal adhesive system.

Download

Share

COinS