激光脉冲能量和修复复合材料粘度对老化块体填充树脂复合材料修复剪切粘接强度的影响。

IF 1.8 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Frontiers in dental medicine Pub Date : 2026-03-23 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdmed.2026.1795256
Nesrine A Elsahn, Maan Ahmad Alshouli, Saleh Aneess Bahdar, Muhammad Sohail Zafar
{"title":"激光脉冲能量和修复复合材料粘度对老化块体填充树脂复合材料修复剪切粘接强度的影响。","authors":"Nesrine A Elsahn, Maan Ahmad Alshouli, Saleh Aneess Bahdar, Muhammad Sohail Zafar","doi":"10.3389/fdmed.2026.1795256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Repairing failed resin composite restorations remains clinically challenging, and the longevity of repaired restorations depends on achieving a strong interfacial bond. This study evaluated the influence of different surface treatments and repair composite types on the repair shear bond strength (RBS) of aged bulk-fill resin composites.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>One hundred and fifteen standardized Filtek™ One Bulk-Fill Restorative (3M) composite discs (4 mm × 10 mm) were thermocycled (5,000 cycles, 5-55 °C). Specimens were divided into five surface treatment groups: Er:YAG laser at 50 mJ (L50), 150 mJ (L150), and 250 mJ (L250), air abrasion (A), and diamond bur control (B). After surface treatment, a universal adhesive was applied, and three composite cylinders (2 mm × 2 mm) were built per specimen using either Filtek Z250 XT Nano-Hybrid (N), Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable (F), or Filtek One Bulk-Fill Restorative (R) (<i>n</i> = 10). Repaired samples were thermocycled again (×5,000) and tested for RBS. Surface roughness (Ra, Sa) was assessed by profilometry and AFM, and SEM micrographs were used to examine surface morphology. Data were analyzed using two-way and one-way ANOVA with <i>post hoc</i> tests (<i>α</i> = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface treatment and its interaction with the repair composite type significantly influenced RBS (<i>p</i> < 0.05), whereas the repair composite type did not significantly influence RBS (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The highest RBS values were recorded for L250 and Air Abrasion, while L50 yielded the lowest across all composites. L250 showed the highest Ra and Sa values. AFM and SEM confirmed pronounced peaks, valleys, and microretentive pits in the L250 and Air Abrasion groups, whereas smoother surfaces were observed following bur and low-energy laser treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High-energy Er:YAG laser (250 mJ) and air abrasion significantly enhanced repair bond strength by generating retentive surface topographies. The repair composite type had minimal influence, though low-viscosity materials performed better on highly ablated surfaces due to improved flow and adaptation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73077,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in dental medicine","volume":"7 ","pages":"1795256"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13050946/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of laser pulse energy and repair composite viscosity on the repair shear bond strength of aged bulk-fill resin composites.\",\"authors\":\"Nesrine A Elsahn, Maan Ahmad Alshouli, Saleh Aneess Bahdar, Muhammad Sohail Zafar\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdmed.2026.1795256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Repairing failed resin composite restorations remains clinically challenging, and the longevity of repaired restorations depends on achieving a strong interfacial bond. This study evaluated the influence of different surface treatments and repair composite types on the repair shear bond strength (RBS) of aged bulk-fill resin composites.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>One hundred and fifteen standardized Filtek™ One Bulk-Fill Restorative (3M) composite discs (4 mm × 10 mm) were thermocycled (5,000 cycles, 5-55 °C). Specimens were divided into five surface treatment groups: Er:YAG laser at 50 mJ (L50), 150 mJ (L150), and 250 mJ (L250), air abrasion (A), and diamond bur control (B). After surface treatment, a universal adhesive was applied, and three composite cylinders (2 mm × 2 mm) were built per specimen using either Filtek Z250 XT Nano-Hybrid (N), Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable (F), or Filtek One Bulk-Fill Restorative (R) (<i>n</i> = 10). Repaired samples were thermocycled again (×5,000) and tested for RBS. Surface roughness (Ra, Sa) was assessed by profilometry and AFM, and SEM micrographs were used to examine surface morphology. Data were analyzed using two-way and one-way ANOVA with <i>post hoc</i> tests (<i>α</i> = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface treatment and its interaction with the repair composite type significantly influenced RBS (<i>p</i> < 0.05), whereas the repair composite type did not significantly influence RBS (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The highest RBS values were recorded for L250 and Air Abrasion, while L50 yielded the lowest across all composites. L250 showed the highest Ra and Sa values. AFM and SEM confirmed pronounced peaks, valleys, and microretentive pits in the L250 and Air Abrasion groups, whereas smoother surfaces were observed following bur and low-energy laser treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High-energy Er:YAG laser (250 mJ) and air abrasion significantly enhanced repair bond strength by generating retentive surface topographies. The repair composite type had minimal influence, though low-viscosity materials performed better on highly ablated surfaces due to improved flow and adaptation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in dental medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 \",\"pages\":\"1795256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13050946/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in dental medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdmed.2026.1795256\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in dental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdmed.2026.1795256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:修复失败的树脂复合修复体在临床上仍然具有挑战性,修复后的修复体的寿命取决于实现强大的界面结合。研究了不同表面处理方式和修复复合材料类型对老化块体填充树脂复合材料修复剪切粘结强度的影响。材料和方法:115个标准的Filtek™One Bulk-Fill Restorative (3M)复合光盘(4mm × 10mm)进行热循环(5000次循环,5-55°C)。将样品分为5个表面处理组:Er:YAG激光50 mJ (L50)、150 mJ (L150)和250 mJ (L250),空气研磨(A)和金刚石研磨(B)。表面处理后,应用通用粘合剂,每个样品使用Filtek Z250 XT纳米混合(N), Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable (F)或Filtek One Bulk-Fill Restorative (R) (N = 10)构建三个复合圆柱体(2mm × 2mm)。修复后的样品再次热循环(×5,000)并检测RBS。表面粗糙度(Ra, Sa)通过轮廓术和原子力显微镜(AFM)评估,并使用SEM显微照片检查表面形貌。采用双因素方差分析和单因素方差分析,并进行事后检验(α = 0.05)。结果:表面处理及其与修复复合类型的交互作用显著影响RBS (p p > 0.05)。L250和Air Abrasion的RBS值最高,而L50的RBS值最低。L250的Ra和Sa值最高。AFM和SEM证实,在L250和空气磨损组中有明显的峰、谷和微保留凹坑,而在bur和低能激光处理组中观察到更光滑的表面。结论:高能Er:YAG激光(250 mJ)和空气磨蚀通过产生保留的表面形貌显著提高修复结合强度。修复复合材料类型的影响最小,但由于流动性和适应性的改善,低粘度材料在高度烧蚀表面上表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of laser pulse energy and repair composite viscosity on the repair shear bond strength of aged bulk-fill resin composites.

Background: Repairing failed resin composite restorations remains clinically challenging, and the longevity of repaired restorations depends on achieving a strong interfacial bond. This study evaluated the influence of different surface treatments and repair composite types on the repair shear bond strength (RBS) of aged bulk-fill resin composites.

Materials and methods: One hundred and fifteen standardized Filtek™ One Bulk-Fill Restorative (3M) composite discs (4 mm × 10 mm) were thermocycled (5,000 cycles, 5-55 °C). Specimens were divided into five surface treatment groups: Er:YAG laser at 50 mJ (L50), 150 mJ (L150), and 250 mJ (L250), air abrasion (A), and diamond bur control (B). After surface treatment, a universal adhesive was applied, and three composite cylinders (2 mm × 2 mm) were built per specimen using either Filtek Z250 XT Nano-Hybrid (N), Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable (F), or Filtek One Bulk-Fill Restorative (R) (n = 10). Repaired samples were thermocycled again (×5,000) and tested for RBS. Surface roughness (Ra, Sa) was assessed by profilometry and AFM, and SEM micrographs were used to examine surface morphology. Data were analyzed using two-way and one-way ANOVA with post hoc tests (α = 0.05).

Results: Surface treatment and its interaction with the repair composite type significantly influenced RBS (p < 0.05), whereas the repair composite type did not significantly influence RBS (p > 0.05). The highest RBS values were recorded for L250 and Air Abrasion, while L50 yielded the lowest across all composites. L250 showed the highest Ra and Sa values. AFM and SEM confirmed pronounced peaks, valleys, and microretentive pits in the L250 and Air Abrasion groups, whereas smoother surfaces were observed following bur and low-energy laser treatments.

Conclusions: High-energy Er:YAG laser (250 mJ) and air abrasion significantly enhanced repair bond strength by generating retentive surface topographies. The repair composite type had minimal influence, though low-viscosity materials performed better on highly ablated surfaces due to improved flow and adaptation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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
小红书