Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Repairability of Aged Dimethacrylate-Free Ormocer-Based Dental Composite Resins With Different Surface Roughening Methods and Intermediate Materials Publisher



Pirmoradian M1 ; Jerri Albakhakh BA2 ; Behroozibakhsh M3 ; Pedram P1
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Graduate student, PhD candidate, Department of Dental Biomaterials, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Basra University, Basra, Iraq
  3. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Dental Biomaterials, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Published:2022


Abstract

Statement of problem: The repair of damaged composite resin restorations has been recommended as a conservative treatment option. However, a reliable protocol for repairing ORMOCER-based restorations is lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of different surface roughening methods, repair composite resins, and intermediate materials on the repair bond strength of a dimethacrylate-free ORMOCER-based composite resin. Material and methods: Cylindrical composite resin specimens (Admira Fusion) were roughened by using hydrofluoric acid (HF) or a diamond rotary instrument. In both groups, 4 types of intermediate materials were used (Monobond-S, Clearfil SE bond [second bottle], Clearfil Universal bond, GC Composite Primer), and then half of the specimens were repaired with a similar composite resin, and the other half with dimethacrylate composite resin (Clearfil-APX). The specimens (n=20) were then subjected to repair bond strength and failure mode evaluation. The data were analyzed by using the Weibull test, 3-way and 1-way ANOVA, and the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) test (α=.05). Results: All variables, including the surface roughening method, intermediate material, and repair composite resin, had a significant effect on repair bond strength (P<.001). The lowest repair bond strength values were obtained in the group roughened with HF, prepared with Monobond-S, and repaired with Admira Fusion, and the highest values were obtained in the group roughened with a rotary instrument, prepared with GC Composite Primer, and repaired with Clearfil APX (P<.05). All experimental groups had a lower bond strength than the cohesive and control groups (P<.05). In all experimental groups, the predominant failure modes were adhesive and mixed. Conclusions: The use of a diamond rotary instrument was a more reliable method of creating roughness, and different intermediate materials based on the clinical situation can be used to repair dimethacrylate-free ORMOCER-based composite resin with similar or different composite resins. However, in general, the highest repair bond strengths were achieved with Clearfil APX-repaired specimens. © 2022 Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Experts (# of related papers)
Other Related Docs
16. Remineralization and Antibacterial Capabilities of Resin-Based Dental Nanocomposites, Applications of Nanocomposite Materials in Dentistry (2019)
18. Remineralization and Antibacterial Capabilities of Resin-Based Dental Nanocomposites, Applications of Nanocomposite Materials in Dentistry (2018)