Which Factors Influence the Shear Bond Strength of Sealant Materials?

Meng-Ling Chiang, Sebastian Birlbauer, Yi-Fang Lo, V. Pitchika, A. Crispin, N. Ilie, R. Hickel, J. Kühnisch
{"title":"Which Factors Influence the Shear Bond Strength of Sealant Materials?","authors":"Meng-Ling Chiang, Sebastian Birlbauer, Yi-Fang Lo, V. Pitchika, A. Crispin, N. Ilie, R. Hickel, J. Kühnisch","doi":"10.3290/j.jad.a36917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE This study investigated the influence of several methodological details on the shear bond strength (SBS) testing of pit and fissure sealants. The following variables were considered: type of enamel surfaces, prismatic vs aprismatic enamel, etching time, and aging and shearing procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS The surfaces of 180 healthy human third molars were divided into 4 different sections (mesial, distal, buccal, and oral). After tooth separation, the specimens were randomly allocated to the following groups: 1) enamel preparation: prismatic vs aprismatic; 2) etching: 30 s vs 60 s; 3) aging: 1 day or 3 months vs 5000 thermocycles; 4) shearing: notched-edge method (ISO 29022:2013) vs knife-edge method. After following each protocol, SBS was determined using a universal testing machine, followed by failure mode analysis. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney U-tests and regression analyses. RESULTS In the aprismatic enamel group, the longer etching time resulted in slightly, not statistically significantly higher SBS. When aging sealants on aprismatic enamel with different procedures, significantly lower SBS was found for 5000 thermocycles. In the case of aprismatic enamel etched for 60 s and sheared with the notched-edge blade, there was no significant difference between the aging procedures. Failure mode analysis showed adhesive failures to be predominant. Simple linear regression revealed that all of the included factors significantly influenced SBS. In a multiple linear regression model, the variables \"aprismatic enamel\" and \"distal surface\" were associated with a higher SBS; \"5000 thermocycles\" reduced SBS significantly. CONCLUSION Enamel grinding, aging method, and type of enamel surface significantly influenced the SBS.","PeriodicalId":94234,"journal":{"name":"The journal of adhesive dentistry","volume":"66 1","pages":"397-404"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of adhesive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a36917","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

PURPOSE This study investigated the influence of several methodological details on the shear bond strength (SBS) testing of pit and fissure sealants. The following variables were considered: type of enamel surfaces, prismatic vs aprismatic enamel, etching time, and aging and shearing procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS The surfaces of 180 healthy human third molars were divided into 4 different sections (mesial, distal, buccal, and oral). After tooth separation, the specimens were randomly allocated to the following groups: 1) enamel preparation: prismatic vs aprismatic; 2) etching: 30 s vs 60 s; 3) aging: 1 day or 3 months vs 5000 thermocycles; 4) shearing: notched-edge method (ISO 29022:2013) vs knife-edge method. After following each protocol, SBS was determined using a universal testing machine, followed by failure mode analysis. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney U-tests and regression analyses. RESULTS In the aprismatic enamel group, the longer etching time resulted in slightly, not statistically significantly higher SBS. When aging sealants on aprismatic enamel with different procedures, significantly lower SBS was found for 5000 thermocycles. In the case of aprismatic enamel etched for 60 s and sheared with the notched-edge blade, there was no significant difference between the aging procedures. Failure mode analysis showed adhesive failures to be predominant. Simple linear regression revealed that all of the included factors significantly influenced SBS. In a multiple linear regression model, the variables "aprismatic enamel" and "distal surface" were associated with a higher SBS; "5000 thermocycles" reduced SBS significantly. CONCLUSION Enamel grinding, aging method, and type of enamel surface significantly influenced the SBS.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
哪些因素影响密封胶材料的剪切粘结强度?
目的探讨几种方法细节对坑缝密封胶剪切结合强度(SBS)测试的影响。考虑了以下变量:牙釉质表面类型,棱柱形牙釉质与棱柱形牙釉质,蚀刻时间,老化和剪切过程。材料与方法将180颗健康人第三磨牙表面分为近中、远中、颊和口腔4个不同的切面。牙分离后,将标本随机分为以下组:1)牙釉质制备组:棱柱形组与棱柱形组;2)蚀刻:30秒vs 60秒;3)老化:1天或3个月vs 5000热循环;4)剪切:切口法(ISO 29022:2013)与刀口法。在遵循每个协议之后,使用通用测试机确定SBS,然后进行故障模式分析。数据分析采用Mann-Whitney u检验和回归分析。结果柱形牙釉质组的SBS随牙蚀时间的延长而略有升高,但无统计学意义。采用不同的老化方法对柱状牙釉质进行老化处理,在5000个热循环中,SBS明显降低。在棱柱状牙釉质蚀刻60 s并用缺口刃剪切的情况下,老化程序之间没有显着差异。失效模式分析表明,胶粘剂失效占主导地位。简单线性回归结果显示,所有因素对SBS均有显著影响。在多元线性回归模型中,“棱柱状牙釉质”和“远端表面”变量与较高的SBS相关;“5000热循环”显著降低SBS。结论牙釉质研磨、老化方式、牙釉质表面类型对SBS有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Hydrofluoric Acid in Dentistry: An Investigation of Isolation and Neutralizing Agents and Precipitates on IPS e.max CAD. Influence of Operator, Tool, Dental Loupes, and Tooth Position on Enamel Loss and Composite Remnants After Removal of Composite Attachments for Orthodontic Clear Aligners: An Experimental Study Using 3D Profilometry. Long-term Survival Rate and Clinical Quality of Individually Layered Indirect Composite Restorations in Adolescents and Young Adults. A Novel Graphite Fluoride/Bioactive Glass-containing Orthodontic Primer with Antibacterial and Remineralization Properties: An In-vitro Study. Can Orthodontic Adhesive Systems Inhibit the Formation and Development of White Spot Lesions During Fixed Orthodontic Treatment? A Systematic Review.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1