Bond strengths of bulk-fill resin composite repairs: effect of different surface treatment protocols in vitro

To evaluate the effect of different surface treatment protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of bulk-fill resin composite repairs. Thirty-five bulk-fill resin composite samples (Filtek Bulk Fill) were prepared (5 × 5 × 5 mm) and aged by thermocycling (X5000). Samples were randomly divide...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of adhesion science and technology 2018-05, Vol.32 (9), p.921-930
Main Authors: Atalay, Cansu, Yazici, A. Ruya, Ozgunaltay, Gul
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adhesive bonding
Aluminum oxide
Bond strength
Bonding strength
bulk-fill composite
Composite materials
Distilled water
laser
Lasers
Maintenance
microtensile bond strength
Phosphoric acid
Repair
Sandblasting
Surface treatment
Thermal cycling
universal adhesive
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate the effect of different surface treatment protocols on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of bulk-fill resin composite repairs. Thirty-five bulk-fill resin composite samples (Filtek Bulk Fill) were prepared (5 × 5 × 5 mm) and aged by thermocycling (X5000). Samples were randomly divided into five groups (n = 7): a control (no treatment) and four surface treatment groups (Single Bond Universal [SBU]; phosphoric acid (37%) + SBU; Er,Cr:YSGG laser + SBU; aluminum oxide sandblasting + SBU). Filtek Ultimate Universal composite was used as a repair material. After storage for 24 h in distilled water (37 °C), sticks were obtained and subjected to a μTBS test. The data (MPa) were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with a post hoc test (α = 0.05). Failure mode was evaluated using a light microscope (10×). There were significant differences between the groups (p 
ISSN:0169-4243
1568-5616
DOI:10.1080/01694243.2017.1395162