Volume 129, Issue 6 e12814
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Repair potential of a bulk-fill resin composite: Effect of different surface-treatment protocols

Sinem Akgül

Corresponding Author

Sinem Akgül

Restorative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

Correspondence

Sinem Akgül, Restorative Dentistry Department, Gazi University Faculty of Dentistry, Bişkek Main Street, (8.Cd.) 82. Street. Number: 4 Emek Ankara 06510, Turkey.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Cemile Kedici Alp

Cemile Kedici Alp

Restorative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author
Oya Bala

Oya Bala

Restorative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 26 July 2021
Citations: 1

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of different surface-treatment protocols on the repair bond strength of a bulk-fill resin composite. One-hundred and forty specimens (Filtek Bulk-fill) were created (5 mm diameter, 4 mm depth) and allocated to one of 14 groups according to surface treatment (no treatment, tribochemical silica coating, sandblasting with aluminum oxide), adhesive application (no adhesive, total-etch, self-etch), and type of repair resin (bulk-fill, universal resin) (n = 10 per group). Twenty specimens were selected for measuring the cohesive strengths of non-aged resin composites and used as reference. Other specimens were thermocycled. Shear bond-strength testing was performed. Data were analyzed using linear regression of bond strength as a function of the surface treatment, type of adhesive and whether or not adhesive was applied, and type of repair resin. The failure modes were analyzed using logistic regression of failure mode (cohesive failure vs. other types, or adhesive failure vs. other types) on the type of surface treatment, adhesive application, and repair resin used. Surface treatment, regardless of whether this was tribochemical silica coating (mean difference = 5.44 MPa; 95% CI = 4.77–6.11) or sandblasting with aluminum oxide (mean difference = 4.22 MPa; 95% CI = 3.55–4.88), resulted in higher shear bond strength than no treatment. Application of adhesive resulted in a substantial and statistically significant decrease of shear bond strength (by 8.77 MPa, for self-etch and by 7.26 MPa for total-etch) relative to no adhesive. Conversely, the type of repair resin did not influence the shear bond strength to any appreciable extent.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no financial or commercial conflict of interest in any products used in this study.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization: Sinem Akgül, Oya Bala; Methodology: Sinem Akgül, Cemile Kedici Alp; Validation: Oya Bala; Resources: Oya Bala; Data Curation: Cemile Kedici Alp; Writing–original draft: Sinem Akgül; Writing, Review& Editing: Sinem Akgül, Oya Bala; Visualization: Sinem Akgül.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.