EFFECT OF THREE DIFFERENT SURFACE TREATMENT PROTOCOLS ON MICROMORPHOLOGY AND BOND STRENGTH OF TWO TYPES OF REPAIRED COMPOSITE RESTORATIONS (IN VITRO STUDY)

Authors

  • Azheen Mohammed HamaXareeb Sulaimani Directorate of Health, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.
  • Bestoon Mohammed Faraj Conservative Department, College of Dentistry, University of Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17656/jsmc.10220

Keywords:

Composite Resin, Treatment Protocols, Micromorphology, Bond Strength

Abstract

Background 

Repair bond strength of different composite resins has been assessed in the literature. Clinical findings on the efficacy of available surface treatment protocols are debated. 

Objectives

This in vitro study was conducted to evaluate the effect of three different surface treatment protocols on the bond strength of microhybrid and nanohybrid composite resins.

Materials and Methods

Sixty cured composite specimens divided equally into 2 groups, microhybrid and nanohybrid composite resins. Each group divided equally into 3 subgroups specific to surface treatment protocols; Group A-(Application by erbium YAG Laser), Group B-(Diamond bur abrading followed by 35% phosphoric acid etching), and Group C-(9.5% Hydrofluoric acid etching and primer bonding). All the specimens were stored for 1 week in distilled water at 37°C using an incubator. After this period they were subjected to 500 thermocycles between 5°C and 55°C, with 30s dwell time. Surface micromorphology of the above composite resins was evaluated after surface treatment by using a scanning electron microscope. Composite blocks were repaired with the same composite type but of a different color. Then micro shear bond strength findings analyzed statistically.

Results

Microhybrid composite showed significantly higher bond strength. Hydrofluoric acid etching combined with primer bonding was significantly superior to the other two methods.

Conclusions

Microhybrid composite showed a better repair bond strength compared with nanohybrid composite. Among the assessed preparation protocols, group C showed the higher bond strength, followed by group B and group A showed the lowest repair bond strength.

References

Gordan V V, Riley J L, Geraldeli S, Rindal, D B, Qvist, V, Fellows, J L, Kellum, H P, Gilbert, G H, Dent Practice-Based Res, N. Repair or replacement o f defective restorations by dentists in the Dental Practice-Based Research Network. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012; 143, 593-601. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0238

Loomans, B A C, Cardoso, M V, Roeters, F J M, Opdam, N J M, De Munck, J, Huysmans, M C D N J M, Van Meerbeek, t. Is there one optimal repair technique for all composites. Dent Mater. 2011(a); 27, 701-709. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.03.013

Hickel, R., Brueshaver, K. & Ilie, N. Repair of restorations – Criteria for decision making and clinical recommendations. Dent Mater.2013; 29, 28-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.07.006

Roulet JF, Wilson NHF, Fuzzi M. Advances in Operative Dentistry.Volume 1: Contemporary clinical practice. Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.2001.

Johannes Brendeke/Mutlu Özcan. Effect of physicochemical aging conditions on the composite-composite repair bond strength, Dent Res J. 2007.

Jafarzadeh Kashi TS, Erfan M, Rakhshan V, Aghabaigi N, Tabatabaei FS . An in vitro assessment of the effects of three surfaceTreatments on repair bond strength of aged composites. Oper Dent.2011; 36: 608-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2341/10-386-L

Vanamala Narayana, Srirekha Ashwathanarayana, Gururaj Nadig, Svanamala Narayana, Srirekha Ashwathanarayana , Gururaj Nadig ,Sushma Rudraswamy, Nubaghushana Doggalli, and S Vijai. Assessment of microleakage in class II cavities having gingival wall in cementum using three different posterior composites, J Int Oral Health. 2014.

Güçlü , N. Dönmez, T. Tüzüner ,M. E. Odabaş,A. P. Hurt N. J. Coleman . The impact of Er:YAG laser Enamel conditioning on the microleakage of a new hydrophilic sealant—UltraSeal XT® hydro. Lasers Med Sci.2016;10.1007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-016-1878-y

Negin Nassoohi, Haleh Kazemi, Morad Sadaghiani, Mona Mansouri, Vahid Rakhshan . Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites, Dent Res J.2015; 44.184.

Fawzy, A, El-Askary, F, Amer, M. Effect of surface treatments on the tensile bond strength of repaired water-aged anterior restorative micro-fine hybrid resin composite. J Dent.2008;36(12), 969-976. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.07.014

Negin Nassoohi, Haleh Kazemi, Morad Sadaghiani, Mona Mansouri, Vahid Rakhshan . Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites, Dent Res J.2015;44.184.

Rinastiti M, Özcan M, Siswomihardjo W, Busscher HJ. Effects of surface conditioning on repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged microhybrid, nanohybrid, and nanofilled composite resins. Clin Oral Invest.2011; 15: 625-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0426-6

Cavalcanti AN, De Lima AF, Peris AR, Mitsui FH, Marchi GM. Effect of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Esthet & Restor Dent.2007; 19: 90-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00073.x

Powers J, Sakaguchi R, Craig R. Craig’s Restorative Dental Materials. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Mosby Elsevier.2006; 89.23.

Khosravanifard B, Anaraki SN, Faraghat S, Sajjadi SH, Rakhshan H, Rakhshan V. Efficacy of 4 surface treatments in increasing the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to salivacontaminated direct composites. Orthod Waves.2011; 70: 65-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.odw.2011.02.003

Joulaei M, Bahari M, Ahmadi A, Savadi Oskoee S. Effect of different surface treatments on repair micro-shear bond strength of silica- and zirconia-filled composite resins. J Dent Re s Dent Clin Dent Prospects.2012; 6:131-7.

Teixeira EC, Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Ritter AV, Swift EJ. Shear bond strength of self-etching bonding systems in combination with various composites used for repairing aged composites. J Adhes Dent.2005;7: 159-64.

Papacchini, F, Dall Oca, S, Chieffi, N, Goracci, C., Sadek, F. T., Suh, B. I. & Ferrari, M . Composite-to-composite microtensile bond strength in the repair of a microfilled hybrid resin: effect of surface treatment and oxygen inhibition. J Adhes Dent.2007;9(1), 25-31.

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572007000600009

Published

2019-12-21

How to Cite

1.
HamaXareeb A, Faraj B. EFFECT OF THREE DIFFERENT SURFACE TREATMENT PROTOCOLS ON MICROMORPHOLOGY AND BOND STRENGTH OF TWO TYPES OF REPAIRED COMPOSITE RESTORATIONS (IN VITRO STUDY). JSMC [Internet]. 2019 Dec. 21 [cited 2024 May 28];9(4):309-16. Available from: https://jsmc.univsul.edu.iq/index.php/jsmc/article/view/jsmc-10220

Similar Articles

1-10 of 102

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.