Methacrylate versus Ormocer - Based Composites: Impact of Preheating on Repair Bond Strength

{"title":"Methacrylate versus Ormocer - Based Composites: Impact of Preheating on Repair Bond Strength","authors":"","doi":"10.21608/mjd.2023.288115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Objective: To evaluate and compare the impact of preheating on the repair bond strength of Methacrylate and Ormocer based composite. Materials and Methods: A total number of 24 standardized cuboid composite blocks were fabricated with the aid of teflon split mold (25×4×4) mm dimensions. Half of these composite blocks were made from a universal nanohybrid methacrylate-based composite and the other half was made from a universal nanohybrid Ormocer based. The top surfaces of all mounted specimens were surface treated with sandblasting, silane coupling agents, and universal adhesive of the same brand of composite. Four cylindrical composite rods (2 mm height, 3 mm internal diameter) were built over each composite block and filled with the repair composite from the same material with the aid of tygon tubes. Composite blocks of both groups were divided into two sub-groups according to the previous treatment of repairing materials (preheated or not preheated). Then half of the blocks with their attached repair materials were stored for 24 h to evaluate the immediate bond strength and the other half was stored in distilled water for 6 months to evaluate the bond durability. Shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine (Instron), and the collected data were statistically analyzed with three-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey test. Results: The outcome of three-way ANOVA revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between the repair bond strength of Methacrylate & Ormocer groups immediately and after 6 months of storage (p=0.03). No statistically significant difference was found between the repair bond strength of the preheated and non-preheated immediately and after 6 months of storage (p=0.7). Conclusions: Immediate and delayed repair bond strength of methacrylate-based resin composite was superior to Ormocer based composite within the preheated group. Preheating of both methacrylate and Ormocer composite did not affect immediate and delayed repair bond strength. Ormocer","PeriodicalId":308616,"journal":{"name":"Mansoura Journal of Dentistry","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mansoura Journal of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/mjd.2023.288115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: Objective: To evaluate and compare the impact of preheating on the repair bond strength of Methacrylate and Ormocer based composite. Materials and Methods: A total number of 24 standardized cuboid composite blocks were fabricated with the aid of teflon split mold (25×4×4) mm dimensions. Half of these composite blocks were made from a universal nanohybrid methacrylate-based composite and the other half was made from a universal nanohybrid Ormocer based. The top surfaces of all mounted specimens were surface treated with sandblasting, silane coupling agents, and universal adhesive of the same brand of composite. Four cylindrical composite rods (2 mm height, 3 mm internal diameter) were built over each composite block and filled with the repair composite from the same material with the aid of tygon tubes. Composite blocks of both groups were divided into two sub-groups according to the previous treatment of repairing materials (preheated or not preheated). Then half of the blocks with their attached repair materials were stored for 24 h to evaluate the immediate bond strength and the other half was stored in distilled water for 6 months to evaluate the bond durability. Shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine (Instron), and the collected data were statistically analyzed with three-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey test. Results: The outcome of three-way ANOVA revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between the repair bond strength of Methacrylate & Ormocer groups immediately and after 6 months of storage (p=0.03). No statistically significant difference was found between the repair bond strength of the preheated and non-preheated immediately and after 6 months of storage (p=0.7). Conclusions: Immediate and delayed repair bond strength of methacrylate-based resin composite was superior to Ormocer based composite within the preheated group. Preheating of both methacrylate and Ormocer composite did not affect immediate and delayed repair bond strength. Ormocer
甲基丙烯酸酯与Ormocer基复合材料:预热对修复粘结强度的影响
目的:评价和比较预热对甲基丙烯酸酯基复合材料修复粘结强度的影响。材料与方法:采用聚四氟乙烯分型模具(25×4×4)制作了24块标准化长方体复合块。这些复合块的一半是由通用纳米杂化甲基丙烯酸酯基复合材料制成的,另一半是由通用纳米杂化Ormocer基复合材料制成的。所有安装试样的顶表面均采用喷砂、硅烷偶联剂和同一牌号复合材料万能胶进行表面处理。四个圆柱形复合棒(2毫米高,3毫米内径)被建造在每个复合块上,并在tygon管的帮助下用相同的材料填充修复复合材料。两组复合块根据修复材料的前期处理(预热或未预热)分为两个子组。然后将一半的砌块及其附着的修复材料保存24 h,以评估即时粘结强度,另一半在蒸馏水中保存6个月,以评估粘结耐久性。剪切粘接强度采用万能试验机(Instron)测量,收集数据采用三因素方差分析和事后Tukey检验进行统计学分析。结果:三因素方差分析结果显示,甲基丙烯酸酯组和Ormocer组在保存6个月后即刻与保存6个月后的修复键强度差异有统计学意义(p=0.03)。保存6个月后,预热与未预热的修复粘结强度差异无统计学意义(p=0.7)。结论:在预热组,甲基丙烯酸酯基树脂复合材料的即刻和延迟修复粘结强度均优于Ormocer基复合材料。甲基丙烯酸酯和Ormocer复合材料的预热对即时和延迟修复粘结强度均无影响。Ormocer
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信