Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin of a Self-adhesive Bulk-fill Resin Composite Restorative Material after Aging (In Vitro Study).

Q3 Dentistry

Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3862

Nourhan S Ibrahim, Wael E Jamil, Nermin A Mahmoud

{"title":"Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin of a Self-adhesive Bulk-fill Resin Composite Restorative Material after Aging (In Vitro Study).","authors":"Nourhan S Ibrahim, Wael E Jamil, Nermin A Mahmoud","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim and background: Self-adhesive composites were introduced to enhance clinical and mechanical characteristics of composite restorations as they contain self-etching monomers allowing their application to tooth without additional treatment.Aim: To evaluate microtensile bond strength of Surefil one self-adhesive composite with and without adhesive application and Filtek One bulk-fill composite after different aging periods.Materials and methods: The occlusal enamel and superficial dentin of 90 sound human third molars were cut using water-cooled diamond saw. A total of 60 molars were restored using Surefil one composite, where half were applied without adhesive and the other half with adhesive. The remaining 30 molars were restored with Filtek One composite. All restored molars were exposed to thermocycling and load cycling, where each group was divided into three subgroups according to aging period (24 hours to 3-6 months). Microtensile bond strength was assessed with universal testing machine after sectioning each molar into beams with cross-sectional area 1.0 ± 0.1 mm2. Fractured specimens were analyzed using stereomicroscope at 25× magnification to determine the failure mode. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro-Wilk, and Pearson's Chi-square tests.Results: Surefil one composite without adhesive showed significantly lower bond strength than Surefil one with adhesive and Filtek one composites. Surefil one composite without adhesive showed 100% adhesive failure. Adhesive and mixed failures were noticed in both composites with adhesive application with highest percentage for adhesive failure after aging.Conclusions: Self-adhesive composites microtensile bond strength is enhanced with adhesive application. Conventional composite has superior microtensile bond strength than self-adhesive composite with or without adhesive application. Aging has detrimental impact on microtensile bond strength regardless of composition of composite resin.Clinical significance: Using adhesive with self-adhesive composites improves their bond strength. Long-term clinical results of composite are impaired by aging. More research is required for strong evidence on clinical use of self-adhesive composites. How to cite this article: Ibrahim NS, Jamil WE, Mahmoud NA. Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin of a Self-adhesive Bulk-fill Resin Composite Restorative Material after Aging (In Vitro Study). J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(4):409-417.","PeriodicalId":35792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","volume":"26 4","pages":"409-417"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3862","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim and background: Self-adhesive composites were introduced to enhance clinical and mechanical characteristics of composite restorations as they contain self-etching monomers allowing their application to tooth without additional treatment.

Aim: To evaluate microtensile bond strength of Surefil one self-adhesive composite with and without adhesive application and Filtek One bulk-fill composite after different aging periods.

Materials and methods: The occlusal enamel and superficial dentin of 90 sound human third molars were cut using water-cooled diamond saw. A total of 60 molars were restored using Surefil one composite, where half were applied without adhesive and the other half with adhesive. The remaining 30 molars were restored with Filtek One composite. All restored molars were exposed to thermocycling and load cycling, where each group was divided into three subgroups according to aging period (24 hours to 3-6 months). Microtensile bond strength was assessed with universal testing machine after sectioning each molar into beams with cross-sectional area 1.0 ± 0.1 mm². Fractured specimens were analyzed using stereomicroscope at 25× magnification to determine the failure mode. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro-Wilk, and Pearson's Chi-square tests.

Results: Surefil one composite without adhesive showed significantly lower bond strength than Surefil one with adhesive and Filtek one composites. Surefil one composite without adhesive showed 100% adhesive failure. Adhesive and mixed failures were noticed in both composites with adhesive application with highest percentage for adhesive failure after aging.

Conclusions: Self-adhesive composites microtensile bond strength is enhanced with adhesive application. Conventional composite has superior microtensile bond strength than self-adhesive composite with or without adhesive application. Aging has detrimental impact on microtensile bond strength regardless of composition of composite resin.

Clinical significance: Using adhesive with self-adhesive composites improves their bond strength. Long-term clinical results of composite are impaired by aging. More research is required for strong evidence on clinical use of self-adhesive composites. How to cite this article: Ibrahim NS, Jamil WE, Mahmoud NA. Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin of a Self-adhesive Bulk-fill Resin Composite Restorative Material after Aging (In Vitro Study). J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(4):409-417.

查看原文本刊更多论文

自粘体填充树脂复合修复材料老化后与牙本质的微拉伸结合强度评价（体外研究）。

目的和背景：引入自粘复合材料，以增强复合修复体的临床和机械特性，因为它们含有自蚀刻单体，允许它们在没有额外处理的情况下应用于牙齿。目的：对不同老化时间后的surefile1自粘复合材料与未涂胶复合材料及Filtek one块填料复合材料的微拉伸粘结强度进行评价。材料与方法：用水冷式金刚石锯切割90颗健全人第三磨牙的咬合牙釉质和表面牙本质。使用一种复合材料修复60颗磨牙，其中一半不使用粘合剂，另一半使用粘合剂。其余30颗磨牙采用Filtek One复合材料修复。所有修复的磨牙均进行热循环和负荷循环，按老化时间（24小时~ 3 ~ 6个月）分为3个亚组。将每个磨牙切成横截面积为1.0±0.1 mm2的梁后，用万能试验机评估微拉伸粘结强度。采用25倍体视显微镜对断裂试样进行分析，确定断裂模式。数据分析采用Kolmogorov-Smirnov、Shapiro-Wilk和Pearson卡方检验。结果：不带粘合剂的Surefil one复合材料的粘结强度明显低于带粘合剂的Surefil one和Filtek one复合材料。无胶粘剂的Surefil 1复合材料100%不粘接。在两种复合材料中都发现了粘结失效和混合失效，使用粘合剂的复合材料在老化后的粘结失效比例最高。结论：胶粘剂的应用提高了自粘复合材料的微拉伸粘结强度。常规复合材料具有优于自粘复合材料的微拉伸强度。无论复合树脂的成分如何，老化都对微拉伸粘结强度有不利影响。临床意义：用胶粘剂与自粘复合材料结合，可提高粘结强度。复合材料的长期临床效果因老化而受损。需要更多的研究来获得临床使用自粘复合材料的有力证据。如何引用本文：Ibrahim NS， Jamil WE, Mahmoud NA。自粘体填充树脂复合修复材料老化后与牙本质的微拉伸结合强度评价（体外研究）。[J]中国现代医学杂志，2015;26(4):409-417。

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

Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice Dentistry-Dentistry (all)

CiteScore

1.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

174

期刊介绍： The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice (JCDP), is a peer-reviewed, open access MEDLINE indexed journal. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.thejcdp.com. The journal allows free access (open access) to its contents. Articles with clinical relevance will be given preference for publication. The Journal publishes original research papers, review articles, rare and novel case reports, and clinical techniques. Manuscripts are invited from all specialties of dentistry i.e., conservative dentistry and endodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthodontics, oral medicine and radiology, oral pathology, oral surgery, orodental diseases, pediatric dentistry, implantology, periodontics, clinical aspects of public health dentistry, and prosthodontics.