15 research outputs found

    Effect of composite surface treatment and aging on the bond strength between a core build-up composite and a luting agent

    Get PDF
    Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of conditioning methods and thermocycling on the bond strength between composite core and resin cement. Material and Methods Eighty blocks (8×8×4 mm) were prepared with core build-up composite. The cementation surface was roughened with 120-grit carbide paper and the blocks were thermocycled (5,000 cycles, between 5°C and 55°C, with a 30 s dwell time in each bath). A layer of temporary luting agent was applied. After 24 h, the layer was removed, and the blocks were divided into five groups, according to surface treatment: (NT) No treatment (control); (SP) Grinding with 120-grit carbide paper; (AC) Etching with 37% phosphoric acid; (SC) Sandblasting with 30 mm SiO2 particles, silane application; (AO) Sandblasting with 50 mm Al2O3 particles, silane application. Two composite blocks were cemented to each other (n=8) and sectioned into sticks. Half of the specimens from each block were immediately tested for microtensile bond strength (µTBS), while the other half was subjected to storage for 6 months, thermocycling (12,000 cycles, between 5°C and 55°C, with a dwell time of 30 s in each bath) and µTBS test in a mechanical testing machine. Bond strength data were analyzed by repeated measures two-way ANOVA and Tukey test (α=0.05). Results The µTBS was significantly affected by surface treatment (p=0.007) and thermocycling (p=0.000). Before aging, the SP group presented higher bond strength when compared to NT and AC groups, whereas all the other groups were statistically similar. After aging, all the groups were statistically similar. SP submitted to thermocycling showed lower bond strength than SP without thermocycling. Conclusion Core composites should be roughened with a diamond bur before the luting process. Thermocycling tends to reduce the bond strength between composite and resin cement

    Evaluation of bond strength of silorane and methacrylate based restorative systems to dentin using different cavity models

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) to dentin of two different restorative systems: silorane-based (P90), and methacrylate-based (P60), using two cavity models. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Occlusal enamel of 40 human third molars was removed to expose flat dentin surface. Class I cavities with 4 mm mesial-distal width, 3 mm buccal-lingual width and 3 mm depth (C-factor=4.5) were prepared in 20 teeth, which were divided into two groups (n=10) restored with P60 and P90, bulk-filled after dentin treatment according to manufacturer's instructions. Flat buccal dentin surfaces were prepared in the 20 remaining teeth (C-factor=0.2) and restored with resin blocks measuring 4x3x3 mm using the two restorative systems (n=10). The teeth were sectioned into samples with area between 0.85 and 1.25 mm(2) that were submitted to µTBS testing, using a universal testing machine (EMIC) at speed of 0.5 mm/min. Fractured specimens were analyzed under stereomicroscope and categorized according to fracture pattern. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey Kramer tests. RESULTS: For flat surfaces, P60 obtained higher bond strength values compared with P90. However, for Class I cavities, P60 showed significant reduction in bond strength (p<0.05). No statistical difference between restorative systems was shown for Class I cavity model (p>0.05), or between Class I Cavity and Flat Surface group, considering P90 restorative system (p>0.05). Regarding fracture pattern, there was no statistical difference among groups (p=0.0713) and 56.3% of the fractures were adhesive. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that methacrylate-based composite µTBS was influenced by cavity models, and the use of silorane-based composite led to similar bond strength values compared to the methacrylate-based composite in cavities with high C-factor

    Longevity of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a polyacid-modified resin composite restoring non-carious cervical lesions in a general dental practice

    Get PDF
    The document attached has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association. An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.Background: Long-term prospective survival studies of resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) and polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) are lacking from general dental practice. Short-term studies have shown an unsatisfactory clinical performance for several materials. Methods: One practitioner placed 87 compomer (Compoglass, Vivadent-Ivoclar) and 73 encapsulated RMGIC (Fuji II LC, GC Int.) restorations in NCCLs for 61 adults. Compoglass was placed using SCA primer and Fuji II LC using GC Dentin Conditioner. No cavity preparation was undertaken. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for estimating the cumulative survivals for those restorations that were replaced, with the probability level set at a=0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Restorations were judged unsatisfactory (by the practitioner and the subjects) because of surface and marginal loss of material (68.8 per cent), dislodgement (18.8 per cent) and discoloration (12.4 per cent), these modes being similar for both materials (P=0.35). Unsatisfactory restorations were replaced in 121 (75.6 per cent) instances. After periods of up to five years, cumulative survival estimates were 14.9 (5.8 Standard Error) per cent for Compoglass and zero per cent for Fuji II LC (P=0.74). Median survivals were 30 months for Compoglass and 42 months for Fuji II LC. Conclusion: Both materials had high long-term unsatisfactory performances when placed in non-prepared NCCLs in a general dental practice.RJ Smales and KKW N
    corecore