-

Abstract

Purpose: Purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different adhesive systems on repair bond strength of a resin composite.Material and Methods: 60 composite discs were build. Half of the discs were subjected to thermal aging. Aged and non-aged specimens were repaired with resin composite using three different adhesive systems; then subjected to micro-shear forces. data were analyzed statistically (p<0,05).Results: Adhesive systems and aging affected the bond strengths (p<0,001). In non-aged groups; there was no statistical difference between groups bonded with 2 step self-etch and 1 step total-etch adhesive. Other groups were statistically different (p<0,05). In aged groups; there were statistical difference between groups bonded with 2 step self-etch and 1 step self-etch adhesive. Other groups were not statistically different (p<0,05). Conclusion: 2 step self-etch and 1 step total-etch adhesives exhibited higher micro shear bond stregth values of aged composites.

Keywords

• Resin composite, repair, micro-shear, adhesive

KOMPOZİT REÇİNELERİN FARKLI ADEZİV ESASLI BAĞLAYICI AJANLAR İLE ONARIMINDA MİKRO-MAKASLAMA KUVVETLERİNİN BAĞLANMA DAYANIMINA ETKİSİ

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı yaşlandırılmış kompozit reçinelerin farklı adeziv ajanlar kullanılarak yapılan onarımlarında ilgili materyallerin bağlanma dayanımlarında mikromakaslama kuvvetlerinin etkisinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Kompozit reçine esaslı 8x5 mm boyutlarında 60 adet disk şeklinde örnek hazırlandı. Örneklerin bağlanma dayanımları mikromakaslama test cihazında ölçüldü ve elde edilen veriler istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi (p < 0,05). Bulgular: Adeziv ajanın ve yaşlandırma yönteminin sonuçlar üzerinde istatistiksel olarak etkinliği saptandı (p < 0,001). Yaşlandırma işlemi uygulanmayan gruplardan 2 aşamalı self-etch adeziv ajan grubuyla tek aşamalı total-etch adeziv ajan grubu arasında fark bulunamazken diğer gruplar arasında istatistiksel fark bulunmaktadır (p < 0,05). Yaşlandırma yapılan gruplardan 2 aşamalı self-etch adeziv ajan grubuyla tek aşamalı self-etch adeziv ajan grubu arasında farklılık bulunmaktayken (p < 0,05); diğer gruplar arasında istatistiksel fark bulunmamaktadır. Sonuç: Yaşlanmış kompozit reçinelerin onarımları mikromakaslama kuvvetlerine dayanım açısından değerlendirildiğinde, iki aşamalı self-etch ve total-etch adeziv ajanlar, tek aşamalı self-etch adeziv ajanlara göre daha yüksek bağlanma dayanım değerleri göstermiştir.

Keywords

• Kompozit reçine, onarım, mikro-makaslama kuvvetleri, adeziv ajan

References

1. Moncada G, Martin J, Fernandez E, Hempel MC, Mjor IA, Gordan VV. Sealing, refurbishment and repair of Class I and Class II defective restorations: a three-year clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc, 2009; 140: 425-32. Gordan VV, Shen C, Riley III J, Mjor IA. Two-year clinical evaluation of repair versus replacement of composite restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2006; 18: 144-53. Foitzik M, Attin T. Filling revision - possibilities and execution. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 2004; 114: 1003-11. Gordan VV, Garvan CW, Blaser PK, Mondragon E, Mjor IA. A long-term evaluation of alternative treatments to replacement of resin-based composite restorations: results of a seven-year study. J Am Dent Assoc, 2009; 140: 1476- 84. Blum IR, Jagger DC, Newton JT, Wilson NH. The opinions of manufacturers of resin-based composite materials towards the repair of failing composite restorations. Prim
2. Dent Care, 2009; 16: 149-53. Moncada G, Fernandez E, Martin J, Arancibia C, Mjor IA, Gordan VV, et al.
3. Increasing the longevity of restorations by minimal intervention: a two-year clinical trial. Oper Dent, 2008; 33: 258-64. Mjör IA, Gordan VV. Failure, repair, refurbishing and longevity of restorations.
4. Oper Dent, 2002; 27: 528-34. Blum IR, Schriever A, Heidemann D, Mjör IA, Wilson NH. Repair versus replacement of defective direct composite restorations in teaching programmes in United
5. Kingdom and Irish dental schools. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 2002; 10: 151-55. Gordan VV, Shen C, Riley J 3rd, Mjör
6. IA. Two-year clinical evaluation of repair versus replacement of composite restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2006; 18: 144-53. Lastumaki TM, Kallio TT, Vallittu
7. PK. The bond strength of light-curing composite resin to finally polymerized and aged glass fiber-reinforced composite substrate. Biomater, 2002; 23: 4533-39. Soderholm KJ, Roberts MJ. Variables influencing the repair strength of dental composites. Scand J Dent Res, 1991; 99: 173-80. Söderholm KJM, Zigan M, Ragan
8. M, Fischlschweiger W, Berghman M. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites. J Dent Res, 1984; 63: 1248-59. Dall’Oca S, Papacchini F, Goracci

9. C, Cury AH, Suh BI, Tay FR, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Effect of oxygen inhibition on composite repair strength over time. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2007; 81: 493-98.
10. Burtscher P. Stability of radicals in cured composite materials. Dent Mater, 1993; 9: 218-22.
11. Soderholm KJ. Flexure strength of repaired dental composites. Scand J Dent Res, 1986; 94: 364-69.
12. Turner CW, Meiers JC. Repair of an aged, contaminated indirect composite resin with a direct, visible light-cured composite resin. Oper Dent, 1993; 18: 187-94.
13. Ferracane JL, Marker VA. Solvent degradation and reduced fracture toughness in aged composites. J Dent Res, 1992; 71: 13Shahdad SA, Kennedy JG. Bond strength of repaired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study. J Dent, 1998; 26: 685Crumpler DC, Bayne SC, Sockwell S, Brunson D, Roberson TM. Bonding to resurfaced posterior composites. Dent Mater, 1989; 5: 417-24.
14. Boyer DB, Chan KC, Reinhardt JW. Build-up and repair of light-cured composites: bond strength. J Dent Res, 1984; 63: 1241Brendeke J, Ozcan M. Effect of physicochemical aging conditions on the composite-composite repair bond strength. J Adhes Dent, 2007; 9: 399-406.
15. Tezvergil A, Lassila LVJ, Vallittu PK. Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers. J Dent, 2003; 31: 521-55.
16. Ozcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GA, Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater, 2007; 23: 1276-82.
17. Papacchini F, Toledano M, Monticelli F, Osorio R, Radovic I, Polimeni A, et al. Hydrolytic stability of composite repair bond. European J Oral Sci, 2007; 115: 417-24. Passos SP, Ozcan M, Vanderlei AD, Leite FPP, Kimpara ET, Bottino MA. Bond strength durability of direct and indirect composite systems following surface conditioning for repair. J Adhes Dent, 2007; 9: 443-47. Kupiec KA, Barkmeier WW. Laboratory evaluation of surface treatments for composite repair. Oper Dent, 1996; 21: 59Brosch T, Pilo R, Bichacho N, Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet
18. Dent, 1997; 77: 122-26. Yap AU, Quek CE, Kau CH. Repair of new-generation tooth-colored restoratives: methods of surface conditioning to achieve bonding. Oper Dent, 1998; 23: 173-78. Yap AU, Sau CW, Lye KW. Effects of aging on repair bond strengths of a polyacidmodified composite resin. Oper Dent, 1999; 24: 371-76. Lucena-Martın C, Gonzalez-Lopez
19. S, Navajas-Rodrıguez de Mondelo JM. The effect of various surface treatments and bonding agents on the repaired strength of heat-treated composites. J Prosthet Dent, 2001; 86: 481-88. Oztas N, Alacam A, Bardakcı Y. The effect of air abrasion with two new bonding agents on composite repair. Oper Dent, 2003; 28: 149-54. Bonstein T, Garlapo D, Donarummo
20. J Jr., Bush PJ. Evaluation of varied repair pro-tocols applied to aged composite resin. J Adhes Dent, 2005; 7: 41-49. Cavalcanti AN, De Lima AF, Peris
21. 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: 90-99.
22. Papacchini F, Dall’Oca S, Chieffi N, Goracci C, Sadek FT, Suh BI, et al. 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: 25-31.
23. Papacchini F, Monticelli F, Radovic I, Chieffi N, Goracci C, Tay FR, et al. The application of hydrogen peroxide in composite repair. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2007; 82: 298-304.
24. Dall’oca S, Papacchini F, Radovic I, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Repair potential of a laboratory-processed nano-hybrid resin composite. J Oral Sci, 2008; 50: 403-12.
25. Rathke A, Tymina Y, Haller B. Effect of different surface treatments on the composite-composite repair bond strength. Clin Oral Invest, 2009; 13: 317-23.
26. Yesilyurt C, Kusgoz A, Bayram M, Ulker M. Initial repair bond strength of a nano-filled hybrid resin: effect of surface treatments and bonding agents. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2009; 21: 251-61.
27. Costa TR, Ferreira SQ, Klein-Junior CA, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Durability of surface treatments and intermediate agents used for repair of a polished composite. Oper Dent, 2010; 35: 231-37.
28. Loomans BA, Cardoso MV, Roeters FJ, Opdam NJ, De Munck J, Huysmans MC, et al. Is there one optimal repair technique for all composites? Dent Mater, 2011; 27: 701-0
29. Shen C, Mondragon E, Gordan VV, Mjör IA. The effect of mechanical undercuts on the strength of composite repair. J Am Dent Assoc, 2004; 135: 1406-12.
30. Fawzy AS, El-Askary FS, Amer MA. Effect of surface treatments on the tensile bond strength of repaired wateraged anterior restorative micro-fine hybrid resin composite. J Dent, 2008; 36: 969-76.
31. Loomans BA, Cardoso MV, Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, De Munck J, Huysmans MC, et al. Surface roughness of etched composite resin in light of composite repair. J Dent, 2011; 39: 499-505. Trajtenberg CP, Powers JM. Effect of hydrofluoric acid on repair bond strength of a laboratory composite. Am J Dent, 2004; 17: 173-76. Pounder B, Gregory WA, Powers JM.
32. Bond strengths of repaired composite resins. Oper Dent, 1987; 12: 127-31. Teixeira EC, Bayne SC, Thompson
33. JY, et al. 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. Gregory WA, Pounder B, Bakus E.
34. Bond strengths of chemically dissimilar repaired composite resins. J Prosthet Dent, 1990; 64: 664-68. Bouschlicher MR, Reinhardt JW, Vargas MA. Surface treatment techniques for resin composite repair. Am J Dent, 1997; 10(6): 279-83. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, et al. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res, 2004; 83: 454-58. Celik EU, Ergücü Z, Türkün LS, Ercan UK Tensile bond strength of an aged resin composite repaired with different protocols. J Adhes Dent, 2011; 13(4): 359-66. Hasani Tabatabaei M, Alizade Y, Taalim S. Effect of various surface treatment on repair strength of composite resin J Dent
35. (Tehran), 2004; 1(4): 5-11. Puckett AD, Holder R, O’Hara JW.
36. Strength of posterior composite repairs using different composite/ bonding agent combinations. Oper Dent, 1991; 16(4): 136-40. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, Cadenaro M, Di Lenarda R, De Stefano
37. Dorigo E. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater, 2008; 24: 90-101.
38. Carvalho, Ricardo M, Adriana P Manso, Saulo Geraldeli, Franklin R Tay, David H Pashley. Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations. Dent Mater, 2012; 28: 72-86.
39. Chee B, Rickman LJ, Satterthwaite, JD. Adhesives for the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions: a systematic review. J Dent, 2012; 40: 443-52. Yazışma Adresi: Özgür IRMAK
40. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Diş Hastalıkları ve Tedavisi A.D. 34093 Çapa-Fatih/İSTANBUL Tel: [phone] e-posta: [e-mail]