Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Paula Carolina Komori de Carvalho, Eduardo Shigueyuki Uemura, Tarcisio José de Arruda Paes Junior, Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges
{"title":"Effect of surface treatments on the bond repair strength of resin composite to different artificial teeth","authors":"Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Paula Carolina Komori de Carvalho, Eduardo Shigueyuki Uemura, Tarcisio José de Arruda Paes Junior, Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges","doi":"10.1186/s40563-018-0108-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of this study was investigate the influence of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength of two different type of artificial resin teeth repaired with composite resin. Fifteen (15) artificial teeth of each material (CR-composite resin and AR-acrylic resin) were divided into four parts and then embedded in acrylic resin. After, the teeth were separated into eight groups according to the surface treatments prior to the repair: control group (c), adhesive application (a), sandblasting (S) and sandblasting followed by adhesive application (Sa). Next, a composite resin cylinder (??=?0.95?mm e h?=?2?mm) simulating a repair was built onto each surface. The specimens were submitted to a microshear bond test after 24?h, using a universal testing machine (1?mm/min, 50 kgf) until fracture. The data was subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test, with a significance level of 5%. ANOVA showed statistical difference for the interaction artificial teeth material* surface treatment (p?=?0.001). CR teeth (29.79?±?11.54?MPa) showed higher bond strength mean values than AR (18.48?±?9.73?MPa). Regardless the artificial teeth material, Sa (36.92?±?6.16?MPa) treatment showed the higher bond strength values. The highest bond strength value was found in CRSa (45.93?±?7.13?MPa) and the lowest was found in ARc (5.38?±?0.90?MPa). Based on the results, tooth material should be taken in account in order to choose the best surface treatment and achieve suitable bond strength values when a repair is necessary. For artificial teeth in acrylic resin, applying an adhesive system is the best procedure, with or without sandblasting the alumina particles. However, for artificial teeth in composite resin, an association of sandblasting followed by applying an adhesive system showed more promising bond strength values.</p>","PeriodicalId":464,"journal":{"name":"Applied Adhesion Science","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6800,"publicationDate":"2018-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40563-018-0108-1","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Adhesion Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40563-018-0108-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
The purpose of this study was investigate the influence of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength of two different type of artificial resin teeth repaired with composite resin. Fifteen (15) artificial teeth of each material (CR-composite resin and AR-acrylic resin) were divided into four parts and then embedded in acrylic resin. After, the teeth were separated into eight groups according to the surface treatments prior to the repair: control group (c), adhesive application (a), sandblasting (S) and sandblasting followed by adhesive application (Sa). Next, a composite resin cylinder (??=?0.95?mm e h?=?2?mm) simulating a repair was built onto each surface. The specimens were submitted to a microshear bond test after 24?h, using a universal testing machine (1?mm/min, 50 kgf) until fracture. The data was subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test, with a significance level of 5%. ANOVA showed statistical difference for the interaction artificial teeth material* surface treatment (p?=?0.001). CR teeth (29.79?±?11.54?MPa) showed higher bond strength mean values than AR (18.48?±?9.73?MPa). Regardless the artificial teeth material, Sa (36.92?±?6.16?MPa) treatment showed the higher bond strength values. The highest bond strength value was found in CRSa (45.93?±?7.13?MPa) and the lowest was found in ARc (5.38?±?0.90?MPa). Based on the results, tooth material should be taken in account in order to choose the best surface treatment and achieve suitable bond strength values when a repair is necessary. For artificial teeth in acrylic resin, applying an adhesive system is the best procedure, with or without sandblasting the alumina particles. However, for artificial teeth in composite resin, an association of sandblasting followed by applying an adhesive system showed more promising bond strength values.
期刊介绍:
Applied Adhesion Science focuses on practical applications of adhesives, with special emphasis in fields such as oil industry, aerospace and biomedicine. Topics related to the phenomena of adhesion and the application of adhesive materials are welcome, especially in biomedical areas such as adhesive dentistry. Both theoretical and experimental works are considered for publication. Applied Adhesion Science is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal''s open access policy offers a fast publication workflow whilst maintaining rigorous peer review process.