Rezin Kompozit ile Tamir Edilen CAD/CAM Bloklarının Bağlanma Dayanımının Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, universal adeziv sistem kullanılarak, nano-hibrit rezin kompozit ile tamir edilen CAD/CAM blokların bağlanma dayanımı (SBS) değerlendirilmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Dört rezin esaslı CAD/CAM blok (Hc Block, Shofu; Cerasmart, GC corp.; Lava Ultimate, 3M; Brilliant Crios, Coltene) kullanılarak 3 mm kalınlığında numuneler hazırlandı (n=10). Bitim işlemi uygulanan numuneler termal siklus ile yaşlandırıldıktan sonra elmas frezler ile pürüzlendirildi. Self-etch modunda universal bir adeziv ajan (OptiBond Universal, Kerr) uygulandı. Tamir için rezin kompozit materyal (Harmonize, Kerr) silikon kalıplara yerleştirildi, polimerize edildi ve 24 saat bekletildi. İlave termal siklus prosedürünü takiben universal test cihazında (AGS-X Universal, Shimadzu) kopma oluşana kadar yük uygulandı. Kopma tipi stereomikroskop (Leica MZ 75, Leica Microsystems) kullanılarak x20 büyütme altında belirlendi. İstatistiksel analiz Fisher's Exact, Kolmogorov-Smirnov ve Kruskal Wallis testleri ile yapıldı (p<0,05). Bulgular: Test edilen gruplar için kopma tipleri arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi (p<0,05). Cerasmart-Lava Ultimate, Cerasmart-Hc Block grupları arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı (p<0,05). En yüksek SBS değeri Hc Blok grubunda (12.2±7.6 MPa) ölçülürken, en düşük değer Cerasmart grubunda (5,1±4.8 MPa) gözlenmiştir. Sonuçlar: Bu çalışma şartları altında, rezin easalı CAD/CAM blok tipi tamir uygulamasında SBS değerini etkilemiştir. Harmonize kompozit ile tamir edilen Cerasmart bloklarda diğer üç CAD/CAM blok tamirinde elde edilen bağlanma dayanımına ulaşılmamıştır.

Keywords

• CAD/CAM Blok
• Makaslama Bağlanma Dayanımı
• Tamir

Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Resin-Based CAD/CAM Blocks Repaired with Resin Composite

Abstract

Objectives: Shear bond strength (SBS) of repaired resin-based CAD/CAM blocks with a resin composite is evaluated in this in-vitro study. Materials and Methods: Resin-based CAD/CAM blocks (Hc Block, Shofu; Cerasmart, GC corp.; Lava Ultimate, 3M; Brilliant Crios, Coltene) were used (n=10). Specimens were prepared and aged with thermocycling. Specimens were roughened by using diamond burs and adhesive agent (OptiBond Universal, Kerr) was applied. Resin composite material was placed onto the roughened surface by using silicone molds for the repair procedure. After 24 hours, second thermocycling procedure was applied and loaded in an AGS-X Universal testing machine (Shimadzu; crosshead speed of 1 mm/min) until failure occurred. Leica MZ 75 stereomicroscope (Leica Microsystems; x20 magnification) was used for the determination of failure type. Kruskal Wallis, Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Fisher’s Exact tests was used for statistical analysis (p<0.05). Results: Failure type differences were not statistically significant for the tested groups (p<0.05); however, multiple comparisons for the Cerasmart-Lava Ultimate and Cerasmart-Hc Block groups showed statistically significant differences (p<0.05). The highest SBS was measured for the Hc Block group (12.2±7.6 MPa) whereas the lowest was for the Cerasmart group (5.1±4.8 MPa). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the resin-based CAD/CAM block type affected the repair SBS value and the bond strength obtained in Cerasmart blocks repaired with Harmonize composite was lower than those obtained in the other three CAD/CAM blocks.

Keywords

• CAD/CAM Block
• Repair
• Shear Bond Strength

References

1. Altinci P, Mutluay M, Tezvergil-Mutluay A. Repair bond strength of nanohybrid composite resins with a universal adhesive. Acta Biomater. Odontol. Scand. 2018;4(1):10-19.
2. Aquino C, Mathias C, Barreto SC, Cavalcanti AN, Marchi GM, Mathias P. Repair bond strength and leakage of non-aged and aged bulk-fill composite. Oral Health. Prev. Dent. 2020;18(1):783-791.
3. Arhun N, Tuncer D. Dental Composite Materials for Direct Restorations. Miletic V, editors. Dental Composite Materials for Direct Restorations. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 245-267.
4. Aung SSMP, Takagaki T, Ikeda M, Tagami J. Ultra-morphological studies on enamel-universal adhesive interface. J. Dent. 2021;104:103527.
5. Barcellos DCSV, Niu LN, Pashley DH, Franklin R, Tay FR, Cesar R, Pucci CR. Repair of composites: effect of laser and different surface treatments. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2015;59:1–6.
6. Bayraktar Y, Arslan M, Demirtag Z. Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin-ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments. Microsc. Res. Tech. 2021;84(6):1145-1154.
7. Bayraktar Y, Demirtağ Z, Çeli Ç. Effect of Er: YAG laser pulse duration on repair bond strength of resin-based and hybrid CAD/CAM restorative materials. J. Adhes. Sci. and Technol. 2020;1-14.
8. Blum IR, Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Factors influencing repair of dental restorations with resin composite. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dent. 2014;6:81-87.

9. Brueckner C, Schneider H, Haak R. Shear bond strength and tooth-composite interaction with self-adhering flowable composites. Oper. Dent. 2017;42(1):90-100.
10. Cho SD, Rajitrangson P, Matis BA, Platt JA. Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser, air abrasion, and silane application on repaired shear bond strength of composites. Oper. Dent. 2013;38(3):1–9.
11. 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;35:231-237.
12. Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent. Mater. 2012;28(1):87-101.
13. Duzyol M, Sagsoz O, Polat Sagsoz N, Akgul N, Yildiz M. The effect of surface treatments on the bond strength between CAD/CAM blocks and composite resin. J. Prosthodont. 2016;25(6):466-471.
14. Edelhoff D, Beuer F, Schweiger J, Brix O, Stimmelmayr M, Güth JF. CAD/CAM-generated high-density polymer restorations for the pretreatment of complex cases: a case report. Quintessence. Int. 2012;43(6):457–467.
15. Elsaka SE. Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems. Dent. Mater. J. 2015;34:161-167.
16. Filho AM, Vieira LC, Araújo E, Monteiro Júnior S. Effect of different ceramic surface treatments on resin microtensile bond strength. J. Prosthodont. 2004;13(1):28–35.
17. Gajewski VE, Pfeifer CS, Froes-Salgado NR, Boaro LC, Braga RR. Monomers used in resin composites: Degree of conversion, mechanical properties and water sorption/solubility. Braz. Dent. J. 2012;23(5:)508–514.
18. Gul P, Altınok Uygun L. Repair bond strength of resin composite to three aged CAD/CAM blocks using different repair systems. J. Adv. Prosthodont. 2020;12(3): 131-139.
19. Güngör MB, Nemli SK, Bal BT, Ünver S, Doğan A. Effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to CAD/CAM resin-ceramic hybrid materials. J. Adv. Prosthodont. 2016;8(4):259-266.
20. Kanzow P, Krois J, Wiegand A, Schwendicke F. Long-term treatment costs and cost-effectiveness of restoration repair versus replacement. Dent. Mater. 2021;37(6):375-381.
21. Kanzow P, Wiegand A, Schwendicke F, Göstemeyer G. Same, same, but different? A systematic review of protocols for restoration repair. J. Dent. 2019;86:1-16.
22. Kanzow P, Wiegand A, Schwendicke F. Cost-effectiveness of repairing versus replacing composite or amalgam restorations. J. Dent. 2016;54:41-47.
23. Kilinc H, Sanal FA, Turgut S. Shear bond strengths of aged and non-aged CAD/CAM materials after different surface treatments. J Adv Prosthodont, 2020;12(5):273-282.
24. Melo MA, Moysés MR, Santos SG, Alcântara CE, Ribeiro JC. Effects of different surface treatments and accelerated artificial aging on the bond strength of composite resin repairs. Braz. Oral. Res. 2011;25(6):485-491.
25. Nassoohi N, Kazemi H, Sadaghiani M, Mansouri M, Rakhshan V. Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites. Dent. Res. J. (Isfahan). 2015;12(6):554-561.
26. Nishigori A, Yoshida T, Bottino MC, Platt JA. Influence of zirconia surface treatment on veneering porcelain shear bond strength after cyclic loading. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1392-1398.
27. Özcan M, Corazza PH, Marocho SM, Barbosa SH, Bottino MA. Repair bond strength of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled resin composites: effect of substrate resin type, surface conditioning and ageing. Clin. Oral. Investig. 2013;17(7):1751-1758.
28. Ozcan M, Raadschelders J, Vallittu P, Lassilla L. Effect of particle deposition parameters on silica coating of zirconia using a chairside air-abrasion device. J. Adhes. Dent. 2013;15(3):211-4.
29. Rekow ED, Silva NR, Coelho PG, Zhang Y, Guess P, Thompson VP. Performance of dental ceramics: challenges for improvements. J. Dent. Res. 2011;90(8):937–952.
30. 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. Investig. 2011;15(5):625-633.
31. Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, Della Bona A. Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent. Mater. 2009;25(4):442-451.
32. Sideridou ID, Karabela MM. Effect of the amount of 3-methacyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane coupling agent on physical properties of dental resin nanocomposites. Dent. Mater. 2009;25(11):1315–1324.
33. Sismanoglu S, Tugce Gurcan A, Yildirim‐Bilmez Z, Gumustas, B. Mechanical properties and repair bond strength of polymer‐based CAD/CAM restorative materials. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2021;18(2):312-318.
34. Stawarczyk B, Krawczuk A, Ilie N. Tensile bond strength of resin composite repair in vitro using different surface preparation conditionings to an aged CAD/CAM resin nanoceramic. Clin. Oral. Investig. 2015;19(2):299-308.
35. Strasser T, Preis V, Behr M, Rosentritt M. Roughness, surface energy, and superficial damages of CAD/CAM materials after surface treatment. Clin. Oral. Investig. 2018;22(8):2787-2797.
36. Turssi CP, Ferracane JL, Ferracane LL. Wear and fatigue behavior of nano‐structured dental resin composites. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B Appl. Biomater. 2006;78(1):196-203.
37. Valente LL, Silva MF, Fonseca AS, Münchow EA, Isolan CP, Moraes RR. Effect of diamond bur grit size on composite repair. J. Adhes. Dent. 2015;17(3):257-263.
38. Zakavi F, Johar N, Moalemnia M, Rakhshan V. Effects of at-home and in-office bleaching and three composite types (hybrid, microhybrid, and nanofilled) on repair shear bond strength of aged composites: A preliminary study. Dent. Res. J. (Isfahan). 2021;18:61.