|
Shear Bond Strength of Bulk-fill Resin Composite after Bur and Air Abrasion Surface Treatments |
|---|---|
| รหัสดีโอไอ | |
| Creator | Peerapong Kupradit |
| Title | Shear Bond Strength of Bulk-fill Resin Composite after Bur and Air Abrasion Surface Treatments |
| Contributor | Sirinporn Anuntasirichinda, Bantita Kanpittaya, Bantita Kanpittaya |
| Publisher | Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University |
| Publication Year | 2564 |
| Journal Title | Chiang Mai Dental Journal |
| Journal Vol. | 42 |
| Journal No. | 2 |
| Page no. | 75-82 |
| Keyword | bulk fill resin composite, resin composite repair, shear bond strength, surface treatment, thermocycling |
| URL Website | http://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/index |
| Website title | Chiang Mai Dental Journal |
| ISSN | 2773-921X |
| Abstract | Objectives: To investigate the shear bond strength of aged bulk fill resin composite after being repaired using different surface treatments and types of resin composite.Methods: Sixty cylindrical specimens of bulk fill resin composite (X-tra fill®) 6 mm in diameter and 4 mm thick were prepared using an acrylic mold. They were aged using thermocycling at 5o and 55o C for 5,000 cycles then mounted with self-cured resin acrylic in PVC tubes. The specimens were divided into 3 groups using surface treatments including (a) abraded with a diamond bur, (b) air abraded (sandblasted) and (c) no surface treatment. The specimens were then divided into 2 subgroups according to the resin composites used (viz.,Filtek Z 350 XT®or X-tra fill®). All of the samples were divided into 6 groups (n = 10); Group 1 (Bur + Filtek Z 350 XT®); Group 2 (Bur + X-tra fill®); Group 3 (Sandblast + Filtek Z 350 XT®); Group 4 (Sandblast + X-tra fill®); Group 5 (No surface treatment + Filtek Z 350 XT®); and, Group 6 (No surface treatment + X-tra fill®). The specimens were then tested for shear bond strength using a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). Fractured samples were examined under stereomicroscope to determine the mode of failure. The results were analyzed using Friedman's Two-way Analysis of Variance by rank with a significance level of 0.05.Results: The respective median sort from highest to lowest values for Group 4, 2, 3, 1, 5, 6 were 25.8, 25.5, 22.1, 21.8, 14.0, and 13.2 MPa. Differences between values were statistically significant (p-value < 0.001). All surface treatments demonstrated significantly greater shear bond strength than not having any surface treatment. Groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 were statistically significant different from group 5 and 6 (p-value < 0.001), but there were no statistically significant difference between Group 1 and group 3 (p-value > 0.99), Group 2 and Group 4 (p-value = 0.94). Repairing with X-tra fill® demonstrated higher shear bond strengths than Filtek Z350 XT®. There was a statistically significant difference between Group 1 and Group 2 (p-value = 0.001), Group 3 and Group 4 (p-value = 0.019), but not between Group 5 and Group 6 (p-value = 0.762). All specimens in Groups 2 and, 4 showed cohesive failure, while Groups 5 and, 6 demonstrated adhesive failure, Groups 1 and, 3 exhibited both types failure.Conclusion: The respective shear bond strengths of X-tra fill® after each repaired was influenced by the surface treatment and types of resin composite. |
