Journals / Clinical Dentistry and Research / 2021 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 2

REPAIR BOND STRENGTH OF AN AGED/NON-AGED GLASS HYBRID RESTORATIVE WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS

YAŞLANDIRILMIŞ / YAŞLANDIRILMAMIŞ CAM HİBRİT RESTORATİFİN FARKLI MALZEMELERLE, TAMİR BAĞLANMA DAYANIMI

Pages
78–85
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Aging did not affect the bond strength of glass-hybrid material when repaired with the glass-ionomer based restorative materials.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background and Aim: To evaluate the tensile bond strength of an aged/non-aged glass hybrid restorative repaired with different restorative materials.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A total of 60 beam-shaped specimens (16x2x2 mm) were prepared using glass-hybrid restorative material (Equia Forte, GC) and then divided into two main groups (n=30); I-non- aged, II-aged (5000X;5-55°C).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Aging did not affect the bond strength of glass-hybrid material when repaired with the glass-ionomer based restorative materials.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:18 specimens
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background and Aim: To evaluate the tensile bond strength of an aged/non-aged glass hybrid restorative repaired with different restorative materials. Methods: A total of 60 beam-shaped specimens (16x2x2 mm) were prepared using glass-hybrid restorative material (Equia Forte, GC) and then divided into two main groups (n=30); I-non- aged, II-aged (5000X;5-55°C). Twelve specimens from each group were left intact for control group (without repair) and the rest 18 specimens were sectioned into two halves acquiring 36 beams. The groups (I and II) were then subdivided into four groups according to the repairing materials (n=12); a- control (Intact glass hybrid (GH), Equia Forte (GC Co.), b- glass hybrid, Equia Forte, c- a resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMCIS), Riva Light Cure (SDI Limited), d- a microhybrid resin composite (CR), Gradia direct posterior (GC Co.) After 24 h storage, the specimens were subjected to tensile bond strength test and the data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni test (p0.05). Conclusion: The tested glass-hybrid restorative material exhibited better tensile bond strength after artificial aging when repaired with resin composite. Aging did not affect the bond strength of glass-hybrid material when repaired with the glass-ionomer based restorative materials.

Özet

Amaç: Yaşlandırılmış ve yaşlandırılmamış cam hibrid restoratifin, farklı restoratif materyallere olan çekme bağlanma dayanıklılığının incelenmesi. Yöntem: Cam hibrid restoratif materyal (Equia Forte, GC) kullanılarak toplamda 60 adet 16x2x2 mm boyutlarında örnek hazırlanmış ve (n= 30); Grup I: Yaşlandırılmamış, Grup II: Yaşlandırılmış (5000X;5-55°C) örnekleri içerecek şekilde iki ayrı gruba ayrılmıştır. Her iki gruptan 12’şer örnek, kontrol grubu olarak ayrılmıştır ve kalan 18 örnek ortadan ikiye kesilerek 36’şar adet örnek elde edilmiştir. Her iki grup da daha sonra, uygulanacak tamir materyaline göre 4 alt gruba ayrılmıştır (m =12); a) Kontrol (kesilmemiş cam hibrid örnekler, Equia Forte, GC), b) Cam hibrid restoratif materyal (Equia Forte, GC), c) Rezin modifiye cam iyonomer siman (RivaLightCure, SDI), d) mikrohibrid rezin kompozit (Gradia direct posterior, GC). 24 saat bekletildikten sonra, örnekler çekme bağlanma dayanıklılığı testine tabi tutulmuş ve veriler çift yönlü ANOVA ve Bonferroni testleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. (p 0,05) Sonuç: Test edilen cam hibrid restoratif materyalin kompozit rezinle tamir edildiği durumda, yaşlandırılmış örnekler, yaşlandırılmamış olanlara göre daha yüksek bağlanma değerleri göstermişlerdir. Yaşlandırma, cam hibrid restoratif materyal, cam iyonomer esaslı materyallerle tamir edildiğinde, bağlanma kuvvetini etkilememiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

MERAL, E., USLU, A., YAZICI, A. R. (2022). REPAIR BOND STRENGTH OF AN AGED/NON-AGED GLASS HYBRID RESTORATIVE WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS. Clinical Dentistry and Research, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 2, 78–85. https://ajindex.com/articles/474518

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Mount GJ, Ngo H. Minimal intervention: a new concept for operative dentistry. Quintessence Int 2000; 31(8): 527-533
  2. Davidson CL. Advances in glass-ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci 2006; 14 Suppl: 3-9
  3. Lohbauer U. Dental glass ionomer cements as permanent filling materials?–properties, limitations and future trends. Materials 2010; 3(1): 76-96
  4. Yasa E, Atalayin C, Karacolak G, Sarı T, Turkun LS. Intrapulpal temperature changes during curing of different bulk-fill restorative materials. Dent Mater J 2017: 2016-200
  5. Schwendicke F, Kniess J, Paris S, Blunck U. Margin integrity and secondary caries of lined or non-lined composite and glass hybrid restorations after selective excavation in vitro. Oper Dent 2017; 42(2): 155-164
  6. Kamath U, Salam A. Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars with mod cavities restored with Zirconomer: An in vitro comparative study. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2016; 2: 77-80
  7. Özcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GAP, Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 2007; 23(10): 1276-1282
  8. Gordan VV, MJÖR IA, Blum IR, Wilson N. Teaching students the repair of resin-based composite restorations: a survey of North American dental schools. JADA 2003; 134(3): 317-323
  9. Ong JE-X, Yap A, Hong JY, Eweis AH, Yahya NA. Viscoelastic properties of contemporary bulk-fill restoratives: A dynamic- mechanical analysis. Oper Dent 2018; 43(3): 307-314
  10. Collado-González M, Pecci-Lloret MR, Tomás-Catalá CJ, García- Bernal D, Oñate-Sánchez RE, Llena C, et al. Thermo-setting glass ionomer cements promote variable biological responses of human dental pulp stem cells. Dent Mater 2018; 34(6): 932-943
  11. Francois P, Vennat E, Le Goff S, Ruscassier N, Attal J-P, Dursun E. Shear bond strength and interface analysis between a resin composite and a recent high-viscous glass ionomer cement bonded with various adhesive systems. Clin Oral Invest 2019; 23(6): 2599- 2608
  12. Maneenut C, Sakoolnamarka R, Tyas MJ. The repair potential of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 2010; 26(7): 659-665
  13. Parra M, Kopel H. Shear bond strength of repaired glass ionomers. Am J Dent 1992; 5(3): 133-136
  14. Shaffer R, Charlton D, Hermesch C. Repairability of three resin- modified glass-ionomer restorative materials. Oper Dent 1998; 23: 168-172
  15. Pearson G, Bowen G, Jacobsen P, Atkinson A. The flexural strength of repaired glass-ionome