L Lassila, J Tuokko, A Suni, S Garoushi, P K Vallittu
{"title":"界面表面处理对颗粒填充复合材料与短纤维增强复合材料结合强度的影响。","authors":"L Lassila, J Tuokko, A Suni, S Garoushi, P K Vallittu","doi":"10.1080/26415275.2022.2070489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to investigate the effect of different interfacial surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between a short fiber-reinforced flowable composite (SFRC) and a particulate-filled flowable composite (PFC). In addition, SBS between two successive layers of similar materials was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>One-hundred and forty-four specimens were prepared having either SFRC (everX Flow) as a substructure composite and PFC (G-aenial Flo X) as a surface composite or having one of the two materials as both substructure and surface layer. Eight groups of specimens were created (<i>n</i> = 18/per group) according to the interfacial surface protocol used. Group 1: no treatment; Group 2: ethanol one wipe; Group 3: ethanol three wipes; Group 4: phosphoric acid etching + bonding agent; Group 5: hydrofluoric acid etching + bonding agent; and Group 6: grinding + phosphoric acid etching. Group 7: only PFC layers and Group 8 (control) only SFRC layers without any surface treatment. After one-day storage (37 °C), SBS between surface and substructure composite layers was measured in a universal testing machine, and failure modes were visually analyzed. SEM was used to examine the bonding surface of the SFRC composite after surface treatment. SBS values were statistically analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey HSD test (α = .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SBS between successive SFRC layers (Group 8) was statistically (<i>p</i> < .05) the highest (43.7 MPa) among tested groups. Surface roughening by grinding followed by phosphoric acid etching (Group 6) resulted in a higher SBS (28.8 MPa) than the remaining surface treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Flowable composite with glass fibers (everX Flow) showed higher interlayer SBS compared to PFC flowable composite. Interfacial surface roughness increases the bonding of PFC to the substructure of SFRC.</p>","PeriodicalId":72378,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","volume":"9 1","pages":"33-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090340/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of interfacial surface treatment on bond strength of particulate-filled composite to short fiber-reinforced composite.\",\"authors\":\"L Lassila, J Tuokko, A Suni, S Garoushi, P K Vallittu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/26415275.2022.2070489\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to investigate the effect of different interfacial surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between a short fiber-reinforced flowable composite (SFRC) and a particulate-filled flowable composite (PFC). In addition, SBS between two successive layers of similar materials was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>One-hundred and forty-four specimens were prepared having either SFRC (everX Flow) as a substructure composite and PFC (G-aenial Flo X) as a surface composite or having one of the two materials as both substructure and surface layer. Eight groups of specimens were created (<i>n</i> = 18/per group) according to the interfacial surface protocol used. Group 1: no treatment; Group 2: ethanol one wipe; Group 3: ethanol three wipes; Group 4: phosphoric acid etching + bonding agent; Group 5: hydrofluoric acid etching + bonding agent; and Group 6: grinding + phosphoric acid etching. Group 7: only PFC layers and Group 8 (control) only SFRC layers without any surface treatment. After one-day storage (37 °C), SBS between surface and substructure composite layers was measured in a universal testing machine, and failure modes were visually analyzed. SEM was used to examine the bonding surface of the SFRC composite after surface treatment. SBS values were statistically analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey HSD test (α = .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SBS between successive SFRC layers (Group 8) was statistically (<i>p</i> < .05) the highest (43.7 MPa) among tested groups. Surface roughening by grinding followed by phosphoric acid etching (Group 6) resulted in a higher SBS (28.8 MPa) than the remaining surface treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Flowable composite with glass fibers (everX Flow) showed higher interlayer SBS compared to PFC flowable composite. Interfacial surface roughness increases the bonding of PFC to the substructure of SFRC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"33-40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090340/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2022.2070489\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2022.2070489","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of interfacial surface treatment on bond strength of particulate-filled composite to short fiber-reinforced composite.
Objective: The aim was to investigate the effect of different interfacial surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between a short fiber-reinforced flowable composite (SFRC) and a particulate-filled flowable composite (PFC). In addition, SBS between two successive layers of similar materials was evaluated.
Materials and methods: One-hundred and forty-four specimens were prepared having either SFRC (everX Flow) as a substructure composite and PFC (G-aenial Flo X) as a surface composite or having one of the two materials as both substructure and surface layer. Eight groups of specimens were created (n = 18/per group) according to the interfacial surface protocol used. Group 1: no treatment; Group 2: ethanol one wipe; Group 3: ethanol three wipes; Group 4: phosphoric acid etching + bonding agent; Group 5: hydrofluoric acid etching + bonding agent; and Group 6: grinding + phosphoric acid etching. Group 7: only PFC layers and Group 8 (control) only SFRC layers without any surface treatment. After one-day storage (37 °C), SBS between surface and substructure composite layers was measured in a universal testing machine, and failure modes were visually analyzed. SEM was used to examine the bonding surface of the SFRC composite after surface treatment. SBS values were statistically analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey HSD test (α = .05).
Results: The SBS between successive SFRC layers (Group 8) was statistically (p < .05) the highest (43.7 MPa) among tested groups. Surface roughening by grinding followed by phosphoric acid etching (Group 6) resulted in a higher SBS (28.8 MPa) than the remaining surface treatments.
Conclusion: Flowable composite with glass fibers (everX Flow) showed higher interlayer SBS compared to PFC flowable composite. Interfacial surface roughness increases the bonding of PFC to the substructure of SFRC.