Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study

To evaluate the effect of different adhesive protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and integrity of the repaired bulk fill composite interface. Two hundred and seventy composite blocks made of bulk fill composites of different viscosity were randomly assigned to 18 surface conditioning...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Journal of dentistry 2021-05, Vol.108, p.103637-103637, Article 103637
Hauptverfasser:	Blum, Igor R., Martos, Renáta, Szalóki, Melinda, Lynch, Christopher D., Hegedűs, Csaba
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Adhesion Adhesive systems Adhesives Bond strength Bonding strength Bulk fill composite Composite materials Composite Resins Dental Bonding Dental Cements Failure analysis Integrity Interfaces Light Materials Testing Microscopy Monomers Polymerization Repair Resin Cements Resins Scanning electron microscopy Statistical methods Substrates Surface Properties Surface treatment Tensile Strength Viscosity
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

container_end_page	103637
container_issue
container_start_page	103637
container_title	Journal of dentistry
container_volume	108
creator	Blum, Igor R. Martos, Renáta Szalóki, Melinda Lynch, Christopher D. Hegedűs, Csaba
description	To evaluate the effect of different adhesive protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and integrity of the repaired bulk fill composite interface. Two hundred and seventy composite blocks made of bulk fill composites of different viscosity were randomly assigned to 18 surface conditioning groups (n = 15/group). The universal adhesive systems used were Heliobond™, Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™. A nanohybrid resin composite was applied as the repair material. Negative and positive control groups were included. Stick shape specimens of each group were subjected to μTBS testing. Representative samples from all test groups were subjected to microscopic, proﬁlometric and SEM examination to determine their mode of failure. The data were analysed statistically using two-way ANOVA test, Tukey’s test and the independent t-test (α = 0.05). The mean μTBS of all test groups ranged between 28.5 and 46.8 MPa and varied with the type of adhesive system employed. Signiﬁcantly highest μTBS values were obtained when Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™ adhesives were used (p < 0.01) which were comparable to the coherent strength of the bulk fill resin composite in the positive control groups (p > 0.05). The viscosity of the bulk fill composite did not significantly influence repair bond strength. The microscopy and SEM examination of the failed interfaces revealed a mixture of adhesive and cohesive failures. Under the tested conditions, signiﬁcantly greater μTBS of repaired bulk fill composite was achieved when the substrate surface was treated with adhesive systems containing a functional monomer. Eﬀ ;ecting a repair of a bulk fill resin composite restoration with the application of a functional monomer containing adhesive system, such as Tokuyama Bond Force II™ or Scotchbond Universal™, would seem to enhance the interfacial bond strength and integrity of the repaired resin composite interface.
doi_str_mv	10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103637
format	Article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506285103</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0300571221000580</els_id><sourcerecordid>2506285103</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-4e815afe23246106d94dcced613f4865877cd94b796567ef5dda51e2380f67653</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc-KFDEQxhtR3NnVJxAk4MVLj_nTSXoED8uyrsKCFwVvIZNUmIzpzpikF_ZJ9nWtcVYPHjyl-PKrL6n6uu4Vo2tGmXq3X-89zG3NKWeoCCX0k27FRr3pmVbfn3YrKijtpWb8rDuvdU8pHSjfPO_OhNBKSSZW3cN1COBaJTkQH7EuaEnqUoJ1QFoB2yZUKrGzJ9bvoMY7IBVS6KG5HQnL7FrMs01kynOeoKDVTNoOSIGDjeVovF3SDxJiSsTl6ZBrbFDfk0tS0DRPsYLHi7mVnBKWtS3-_kX3LNhU4eXjedF9-3j99epTf_vl5vPV5W3vxKhbP8DIpA3ABR8Uo8pvBu8ceMVEGEYlR60dalu9UVJpCNJ7KxniIw1KKykuurcn30PJPxeozeB_HKRkZ8hLNVxSxUeJ60X0zT_oPi8FJz9SHBOhcuBIiRPlSq61QDCHEidb7g2j5pib2ZvfuZljbuaUG3a9fvRethP4vz1_gkLgwwkAXMZdhGKqizDjqLFgfsbn-N8HfgGqt6v6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2520160542</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Blum, Igor R. ; Martos, Renáta ; Szalóki, Melinda ; Lynch, Christopher D. ; Hegedűs, Csaba</creator><creatorcontrib>Blum, Igor R. ; Martos, Renáta ; Szalóki, Melinda ; Lynch, Christopher D. ; Hegedűs, Csaba</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate the effect of different adhesive protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and integrity of the repaired bulk fill composite interface. Two hundred and seventy composite blocks made of bulk fill composites of different viscosity were randomly assigned to 18 surface conditioning groups (n = 15/group). The universal adhesive systems used were Heliobond™, Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™. A nanohybrid resin composite was applied as the repair material. Negative and positive control groups were included. Stick shape specimens of each group were subjected to μTBS testing. Representative samples from all test groups were subjected to microscopic, proﬁlometric and SEM examination to determine their mode of failure. The data were analysed statistically using two-way ANOVA test, Tukey’s test and the independent t-test (α = 0.05). The mean μTBS of all test groups ranged between 28.5 and 46.8 MPa and varied with the type of adhesive system employed. Signiﬁcantly highest μTBS values were obtained when Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™ adhesives were used (p < 0.01) which were comparable to the coherent strength of the bulk fill resin composite in the positive control groups (p > 0.05). The viscosity of the bulk fill composite did not significantly influence repair bond strength. The microscopy and SEM examination of the failed interfaces revealed a mixture of adhesive and cohesive failures. Under the tested conditions, signiﬁcantly greater μTBS of repaired bulk fill composite was achieved when the substrate surface was treated with adhesive systems containing a functional monomer. Eﬀ ;ecting a repair of a bulk fill resin composite restoration with the application of a functional monomer containing adhesive system, such as Tokuyama Bond Force II™ or Scotchbond Universal™, would seem to enhance the interfacial bond strength and integrity of the repaired resin composite interface.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0300-5712</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-176X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103637</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33766513</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adhesion ; Adhesive systems ; Adhesives ; Bond strength ; Bonding strength ; Bulk fill composite ; Composite materials ; Composite Resins ; Dental Bonding ; Dental Cements ; Failure analysis ; Integrity ; Interfaces ; Light ; Materials Testing ; Microscopy ; Monomers ; Polymerization ; Repair ; Resin Cements ; Resins ; Scanning electron microscopy ; Statistical methods ; Substrates ; Surface Properties ; Surface treatment ; Tensile Strength ; Viscosity</subject><ispartof>Journal of dentistry, 2021-05, Vol.108, p.103637-103637, Article 103637</ispartof><rights>2021</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited May 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-4e815afe23246106d94dcced613f4865877cd94b796567ef5dda51e2380f67653</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-4e815afe23246106d94dcced613f4865877cd94b796567ef5dda51e2380f67653</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6151-6516</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103637$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33766513$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Blum, Igor R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martos, Renáta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szalóki, Melinda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lynch, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hegedűs, Csaba</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study</title><title>Journal of dentistry</title><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><description>To evaluate the effect of different adhesive protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and integrity of the repaired bulk fill composite interface. Two hundred and seventy composite blocks made of bulk fill composites of different viscosity were randomly assigned to 18 surface conditioning groups (n = 15/group). The universal adhesive systems used were Heliobond™, Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™. A nanohybrid resin composite was applied as the repair material. Negative and positive control groups were included. Stick shape specimens of each group were subjected to μTBS testing. Representative samples from all test groups were subjected to microscopic, proﬁlometric and SEM examination to determine their mode of failure. The data were analysed statistically using two-way ANOVA test, Tukey’s test and the independent t-test (α = 0.05). The mean μTBS of all test groups ranged between 28.5 and 46.8 MPa and varied with the type of adhesive system employed. Signiﬁcantly highest μTBS values were obtained when Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™ adhesives were used (p < 0.01) which were comparable to the coherent strength of the bulk fill resin composite in the positive control groups (p > 0.05). The viscosity of the bulk fill composite did not significantly influence repair bond strength. The microscopy and SEM examination of the failed interfaces revealed a mixture of adhesive and cohesive failures. Under the tested conditions, signiﬁcantly greater μTBS of repaired bulk fill composite was achieved when the substrate surface was treated with adhesive systems containing a functional monomer. Eﬀ ;ecting a repair of a bulk fill resin composite restoration with the application of a functional monomer containing adhesive system, such as Tokuyama Bond Force II™ or Scotchbond Universal™, would seem to enhance the interfacial bond strength and integrity of the repaired resin composite interface.</description><subject>Adhesion</subject><subject>Adhesive systems</subject><subject>Adhesives</subject><subject>Bond strength</subject><subject>Bonding strength</subject><subject>Bulk fill composite</subject><subject>Composite materials</subject><subject>Composite Resins</subject><subject>Dental Bonding</subject><subject>Dental Cements</subject><subject>Failure analysis</subject><subject>Integrity</subject><subject>Interfaces</subject><subject>Light</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>Microscopy</subject><subject>Monomers</subject><subject>Polymerization</subject><subject>Repair</subject><subject>Resin Cements</subject><subject>Resins</subject><subject>Scanning electron microscopy</subject><subject>Statistical methods</subject><subject>Substrates</subject><subject>Surface Properties</subject><subject>Surface treatment</subject><subject>Tensile Strength</subject><subject>Viscosity</subject><issn>0300-5712</issn><issn>1879-176X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc-KFDEQxhtR3NnVJxAk4MVLj_nTSXoED8uyrsKCFwVvIZNUmIzpzpikF_ZJ9nWtcVYPHjyl-PKrL6n6uu4Vo2tGmXq3X-89zG3NKWeoCCX0k27FRr3pmVbfn3YrKijtpWb8rDuvdU8pHSjfPO_OhNBKSSZW3cN1COBaJTkQH7EuaEnqUoJ1QFoB2yZUKrGzJ9bvoMY7IBVS6KG5HQnL7FrMs01kynOeoKDVTNoOSIGDjeVovF3SDxJiSsTl6ZBrbFDfk0tS0DRPsYLHi7mVnBKWtS3-_kX3LNhU4eXjedF9-3j99epTf_vl5vPV5W3vxKhbP8DIpA3ABR8Uo8pvBu8ceMVEGEYlR60dalu9UVJpCNJ7KxniIw1KKykuurcn30PJPxeozeB_HKRkZ8hLNVxSxUeJ60X0zT_oPi8FJz9SHBOhcuBIiRPlSq61QDCHEidb7g2j5pib2ZvfuZljbuaUG3a9fvRethP4vz1_gkLgwwkAXMZdhGKqizDjqLFgfsbn-N8HfgGqt6v6</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Blum, Igor R.</creator><creator>Martos, Renáta</creator><creator>Szalóki, Melinda</creator><creator>Lynch, Christopher D.</creator><creator>Hegedűs, Csaba</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6151-6516</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study</title><author>Blum, Igor R. ; Martos, Renáta ; Szalóki, Melinda ; Lynch, Christopher D. ; Hegedűs, Csaba</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-4e815afe23246106d94dcced613f4865877cd94b796567ef5dda51e2380f67653</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adhesion</topic><topic>Adhesive systems</topic><topic>Adhesives</topic><topic>Bond strength</topic><topic>Bonding strength</topic><topic>Bulk fill composite</topic><topic>Composite materials</topic><topic>Composite Resins</topic><topic>Dental Bonding</topic><topic>Dental Cements</topic><topic>Failure analysis</topic><topic>Integrity</topic><topic>Interfaces</topic><topic>Light</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>Microscopy</topic><topic>Monomers</topic><topic>Polymerization</topic><topic>Repair</topic><topic>Resin Cements</topic><topic>Resins</topic><topic>Scanning electron microscopy</topic><topic>Statistical methods</topic><topic>Substrates</topic><topic>Surface Properties</topic><topic>Surface treatment</topic><topic>Tensile Strength</topic><topic>Viscosity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Blum, Igor R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martos, Renáta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szalóki, Melinda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lynch, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hegedűs, Csaba</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Blum, Igor R.</au><au>Martos, Renáta</au><au>Szalóki, Melinda</au><au>Lynch, Christopher D.</au><au>Hegedűs, Csaba</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>108</volume><spage>103637</spage><epage>103637</epage><pages>103637-103637</pages><artnum>103637</artnum><issn>0300-5712</issn><eissn>1879-176X</eissn><abstract>To evaluate the effect of different adhesive protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and integrity of the repaired bulk fill composite interface. Two hundred and seventy composite blocks made of bulk fill composites of different viscosity were randomly assigned to 18 surface conditioning groups (n = 15/group). The universal adhesive systems used were Heliobond™, Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™. A nanohybrid resin composite was applied as the repair material. Negative and positive control groups were included. Stick shape specimens of each group were subjected to μTBS testing. Representative samples from all test groups were subjected to microscopic, proﬁlometric and SEM examination to determine their mode of failure. The data were analysed statistically using two-way ANOVA test, Tukey’s test and the independent t-test (α = 0.05). The mean μTBS of all test groups ranged between 28.5 and 46.8 MPa and varied with the type of adhesive system employed. Signiﬁcantly highest μTBS values were obtained when Tokuyama bond force II™ and Scotchbond Universal™ adhesives were used (p < 0.01) which were comparable to the coherent strength of the bulk fill resin composite in the positive control groups (p > 0.05). The viscosity of the bulk fill composite did not significantly influence repair bond strength. The microscopy and SEM examination of the failed interfaces revealed a mixture of adhesive and cohesive failures. Under the tested conditions, signiﬁcantly greater μTBS of repaired bulk fill composite was achieved when the substrate surface was treated with adhesive systems containing a functional monomer. Eﬀ ;ecting a repair of a bulk fill resin composite restoration with the application of a functional monomer containing adhesive system, such as Tokuyama Bond Force II™ or Scotchbond Universal™, would seem to enhance the interfacial bond strength and integrity of the repaired resin composite interface.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>33766513</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103637</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6151-6516</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0300-5712
ispartof	Journal of dentistry, 2021-05, Vol.108, p.103637-103637, Article 103637
issn	0300-5712 1879-176X
language	eng
recordid	cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506285103
source	MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects	Adhesion Adhesive systems Adhesives Bond strength Bonding strength Bulk fill composite Composite materials Composite Resins Dental Bonding Dental Cements Failure analysis Integrity Interfaces Light Materials Testing Microscopy Monomers Polymerization Repair Resin Cements Resins Scanning electron microscopy Statistical methods Substrates Surface Properties Surface treatment Tensile Strength Viscosity
title	Effects of different surface treatments and adhesive self-etch functional monomers on the repair of bulk fill composites: A randomised controlled study
url	https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T08%3A30%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20different%20surface%20treatments%20and%20adhesive%20self-etch%20functional%20monomers%20on%20the%20repair%20of%20bulk%20fill%20composites:%20A%20randomised%20controlled%20study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20dentistry&rft.au=Blum,%20Igor%20R.&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=108&rft.spage=103637&rft.epage=103637&rft.pages=103637-103637&rft.artnum=103637&rft.issn=0300-5712&rft.eissn=1879-176X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103637&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2506285103%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2520160542&rft_id=info:pmid/33766513&rft_els_id=S0300571221000580&rfr_iscdi=true