In vitro evaluation of shear bond strengths of different flowable resins

Amaç: Bu in vitro çalışmanın amacı dört farklı akışkan kompozit rezinin dentine olan makaslama bağlanma dayanımlarının belirlenmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmada 60 adet çekilmiş insan molar dişi kullanıldı. Dişler her grupta 15 diş olacak şekilde rastgele dört farklı gruba ayrıldı. Dişlerin dentin yüzeylerine akışkan kompozitler Filtek Flow, (3M ESPE), Vertise Flow (Kerr), Dyract Flow (Dentsply) ve Tetric Flow, (Ivoclar) uygulandı. Vertise flow dışındaki bütün akışkan kompozitler Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Medical) ile birlikte uygulandı. Kompozit materyalleri LED (light emitting diode) ışık kaynağı ile 20 sn polimerize edildi. Örnekler, üniversal bir test cihazı kullanılarak makaslama bağlanma testine tabii tutuldu (0.5 mm/dk, 500 N). Elde edilen veriler mega paskala dönüştürüldü (MPa) ve istatistiksel analiz Tek Yönlü Varyans Analizi ve TUKEY HSD testleri ile yapıldı. Bulgular: Elde edilen makaslama bağlanma dayanım değerleri (Ortalama ±SD): 9.78±3.84 (Vertise Flow), 7.9±3.24 (Dyract Flow), 7±3.91 (Filtek Flow) ve 6.15±2.8 (Tetric Flow) şeklindedir. En yüksek makaslama bağlanma dayanımı değerleri Vertise Flow kompozit rezinde elde edilirken en düşük değerler Tetrik Flow kompozit rezinde elde edildi. Vertise Flow ve Tetrik Flow kompozit gruplarının makaslama bağlanma dayanımı karşılaştırıldığında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark görüldü (p

Farklı akışkan kompozit rezinlerin makaslama bağlanma dayanımının değerlendirilmesi

Background: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of four flowable composite resins to dentin. Methods: Sixty extracted human molar teeth were randomly divided into four groups (15 teeth per group). To test the SBS of Filtek Flow, (3M ESPE), Vertise Flow (Kerr), Dyract Flow (Dentsply), Tetric Flow, (Ivoclar) were applied to the dentin surfaces of teeth. Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Medical) adhesive resin material was used in all flowable composite resins except Vertise Flow. Each composite material was cured using light emitting diode (LED) light for 20 seconds. Specimens were subjected to SBS testing using universal testing machine (0.5 mm/minute, 500 N). The results were calculated in mega pascals (MPa) and analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey HSD test. Results: The SBS values were as follows (mean ±SD in MPa): 9.78±3.84 (Vertise Flow), 7.9±3.24 (Dyract Flow), 7±3.91 (Filtek Flow), 6.15±2.8 (Tetric Flow). Vertise Flow composite resin had the highest SBS values and Tetric Flow composite resin had the lowest SBS values. resin had the highest SBS values and Tetric Flow composite resin had the lowest SBS values. Statistically significant differences were found between SBS values of Vertise Flow and Tetric Flow composite resin (P<0.05). Conclusions: Vertise Flow composite resin yielded a higher SBS value compared with the other flowable resins.Clinical Relevance: In this in vitro study, Vertise Flow composite resin showed a higher SBS value compared with the other flowable resins without using acid etching and dentin bonding material.

___

  • 1. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Jr., Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998 May;129(5):567-77.
  • 2. Elaut J, Asscherickx K, Vande Vannet B, Wehrbein H. Flowable composites for bonding lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod. 2002 Oct;36(10):597-8.
  • 3. Zeng J, Sato Y, Ohkubo C, Hosoi T. In vitro wear resistance of three types of composite resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Nov;94(5):453-7.
  • 4. Park C, Hyun S, Lee J, Seol H, Kim H, Kwon Y. Evaluation of polymerization in fluoride-containing composite resins. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine. 2007;18(8):1549-56.
  • 5. Murchison DF, Charlton DG, Moore WS. Comparative radiopacity of flowable resin composites. Quintessence Int. 1999 Mar;30(3):179-84.
  • 6. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent. 2001 May- Jun;26(3):302-7.
  • 7. Jayasooriya PR, Pereira PN, Nikaido T, Tagami J. Efficacy of a resin coating on bond strengths of resin cement to dentin. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003;15(2):105-13; discussion 13.
  • 8. Figueiredo Reis A, Giannini M, Ambrosano GM, Chan DC. The effects of filling techniques and a low-viscosity composite liner on bond strength to class II cavities. J Dent. 2003 Jan;31(1):59-66.
  • 9. Espelid I, Tveit AB, Erickson RL, Keck SC, Glasspoole EA. Radiopacity of restorations and detection of secondary caries. Dent Mater. 1991 Apr;7(2):114-7.
  • 10. Moon PC, Tabassian MS, Culbreath TE. Flow characteristics and film thickness of flowable resin composites. Oper Dent. 2002 May-Jun;27(3):248-53.
  • 11. Matalon S, Weiss EI, Gorfil C, Noy D, Slutzky H. In vitro antibacterial evaluation of flowable restorative materials. Quintessence Int. 2009 Apr;40(4):327-32.
  • 12. Cura C, Saracoglu A, Cotert HS. Effect of different bonding agents on shear bond strengths of composite-bonded porcelain to enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2003 Apr;89(4):394-9.
  • 13. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003 May-Jun;28(3):215-35.
  • 14. Ferrari M, Goracci C, Sadek F, Eduardo P, Cardoso C. Microtensile bond strength tests: scanning electron microscopy evaluation of sample integrity before testing. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002 Oct;110(5):385-91.
  • 15. Van Landuyt KL, Peumans M, De Munck J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Extension of a one-step self-etch adhesive into a multi-step adhesive. Dent Mater. 2006 Jun;22(6):533-44.
  • 16. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res. 2005 Feb;84(2):118-32.
  • 17. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Pelka M, Petschelt A. Internal adaptation and overhang formation of direct Class II resin composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig. 1999 Dec;3(4):208-15.
  • 18. Kerrdental. Vertise Flow. 20 January 2012: available from http://www.kerrdental.com/index/kerrdental-compositesvertiseflow- 2.
  • 19. Salz U, Bock T. Adhesion performance of new hydrolytically stable one-component self-etching enamel/dentin adhesives. J Adhes Dent. 2010 Feb;12(1):7-10.
  • 20. Sensi LG, Lopes GC, Monteiro S, Jr., Baratieri LN, Vieira LC. Dentin bond strength of self-etching primers/adhesives. Oper Dent. 2005 Jan-Feb;30(1):63-8.
  • 21. Kuraraydental. Clearfil SE Bond technical. 20 january 2012: available from http://www.kuraraydental.com/products/ 19/clearfil-se-bond_technical.pdf.
  • 22. Reis AF, Bedran-Russo AK, Giannini M, Pereira PN. Interfacial ultramorphology of single-step adhesives: nanoleakage as a function of time. J Oral Rehabil. 2007 Mar;34(3):213-21.
  • 23. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H, et al. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res. 2004 Jun;83(6):454-8.
  • 24. Scherrer SS, Cesar PF, Swain MV. Direct comparison of the bond strength results of the different test methods: a critical literature review. Dent Mater. 2010 Feb;26(2):e78-93.
  • 25. Naughton WT, Latta MA. Bond strength of composite to dentin using self-etching adhesive systems. Quintessence Int. 2005 Apr;36(4):259-62.
  • 26. Brackett WW, Tay FR, Looney SW, Ito S, Haisch LD, Pashley DH. Microtensile dentin and enamel bond strengths of recent self-etching resins. Oper Dent. 2008 Jan- Feb;33(1):89-95.
  • 27. Ulker M, Ozcan M, Sengun A, Ozer F, Belli S. Effect of artificial aging regimens on the performance of self-etching adhesives. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2010 Apr;93(1):175-84.
  • 28. Topcu FT, Erdemir U, Sahinkesen G, Mumcu E, Yildiz E, Uslan I. Push-out bond strengths of two fiber post types bonded with different dentin bonding agents. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2010 May;93(2):359-66.