{"title":"单粘结剂修复复合材料剪切粘接强度的研究","authors":"A. A. Al-Asmar, A. Sabra, F. Sawair, A. Khraisat","doi":"10.19080/adoh.2017.06.555695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of repaired composite resin \nrestorations using one-step Single Bond Universal adhesive. \nMaterials and Methods: Sixty cylindrical composite samples (8 x 9 mm each) were prepared from \nFiltek Z350 XT, light-cured and stored for 6 weeks. The surface of each sample was bur-roughened and \nacid-etched with 37% phosphoric acid. Samples (N = 60) were randomly assigned into 2 groups. For \ngroup 1 (the control group), silane coupling agent and bonding agent were applied in two separate steps. \nFor group 2 (the test group), Single Bond Universal adhesive containing both silane and bonding agents \nwas applied to the surface of the samples. Fresh composite resin was bonded to treated surfaces, and \nsamples were cured and stored for another 6 weeks. The shear bond strength (SBS) was measured and \nanalyzed using an independent samples t-test and descriptive statistics. Stereomicroscope examination \nof the samples was done to assess the mode of failure between the original and the repaired composite \nlayers for the control and test groups. \nResults: The mean initial failure SBS for the test group was significantly higher than that of the control \ngroup (p < 0.001). Of the control group samples, 80% failed adhesively, while 100% of the test group \nsamples showed cohesive failure and a mixed mode of failure when observed under the \nstereomicroscope. \nConclusion: Single Bond Universal adhesive provides more reliable bond strength for repaired \ncomposite resin restorations compared with two-step silane and bonding agent application.","PeriodicalId":39681,"journal":{"name":"Jordan Medical Journal","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Composite Using Single Bond Adhesive\",\"authors\":\"A. A. Al-Asmar, A. Sabra, F. Sawair, A. Khraisat\",\"doi\":\"10.19080/adoh.2017.06.555695\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of repaired composite resin \\nrestorations using one-step Single Bond Universal adhesive. \\nMaterials and Methods: Sixty cylindrical composite samples (8 x 9 mm each) were prepared from \\nFiltek Z350 XT, light-cured and stored for 6 weeks. The surface of each sample was bur-roughened and \\nacid-etched with 37% phosphoric acid. Samples (N = 60) were randomly assigned into 2 groups. For \\ngroup 1 (the control group), silane coupling agent and bonding agent were applied in two separate steps. \\nFor group 2 (the test group), Single Bond Universal adhesive containing both silane and bonding agents \\nwas applied to the surface of the samples. Fresh composite resin was bonded to treated surfaces, and \\nsamples were cured and stored for another 6 weeks. The shear bond strength (SBS) was measured and \\nanalyzed using an independent samples t-test and descriptive statistics. Stereomicroscope examination \\nof the samples was done to assess the mode of failure between the original and the repaired composite \\nlayers for the control and test groups. \\nResults: The mean initial failure SBS for the test group was significantly higher than that of the control \\ngroup (p < 0.001). Of the control group samples, 80% failed adhesively, while 100% of the test group \\nsamples showed cohesive failure and a mixed mode of failure when observed under the \\nstereomicroscope. \\nConclusion: Single Bond Universal adhesive provides more reliable bond strength for repaired \\ncomposite resin restorations compared with two-step silane and bonding agent application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jordan Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jordan Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19080/adoh.2017.06.555695\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordan Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19080/adoh.2017.06.555695","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目的:本研究的目的是评估使用一步单粘结通用粘合剂修复的复合树脂修复体的剪切粘结强度。材料和方法:从Filtek Z350 XT制备60个圆柱形复合材料样品(每个8 x 9mm),光固化并储存6周。对每个样品的表面进行毛刺粗糙化,并用37%的磷酸进行酸蚀刻。将样本(N=60)随机分为2组。对于第1组(对照组),在两个单独的步骤中施用硅烷偶联剂和粘合剂。对于第2组(测试组),将含有硅烷和粘合剂的Single Bond Universal粘合剂应用于样品表面。将新鲜的复合树脂粘合到处理过的表面上,并将样品固化并再储存6周。剪切结合强度(SBS)采用独立样本t检验和描述性统计进行测量和分析。对样品进行立体显微镜检查,以评估对照组和试验组原始复合层和修复复合层之间的失效模式。结果:试验组的平均初始失效SBS显著高于对照组(p<0.001)。在对照组样品中,80%的样品粘附失效,而在立体显微镜下观察时,试验组样品100%显示内聚失效和混合失效模式。结论:与两步硅烷和粘结剂的应用相比,单键通用粘结剂为复合树脂修复体提供了更可靠的粘结强度。
Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Composite Using Single Bond Adhesive
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of repaired composite resin
restorations using one-step Single Bond Universal adhesive.
Materials and Methods: Sixty cylindrical composite samples (8 x 9 mm each) were prepared from
Filtek Z350 XT, light-cured and stored for 6 weeks. The surface of each sample was bur-roughened and
acid-etched with 37% phosphoric acid. Samples (N = 60) were randomly assigned into 2 groups. For
group 1 (the control group), silane coupling agent and bonding agent were applied in two separate steps.
For group 2 (the test group), Single Bond Universal adhesive containing both silane and bonding agents
was applied to the surface of the samples. Fresh composite resin was bonded to treated surfaces, and
samples were cured and stored for another 6 weeks. The shear bond strength (SBS) was measured and
analyzed using an independent samples t-test and descriptive statistics. Stereomicroscope examination
of the samples was done to assess the mode of failure between the original and the repaired composite
layers for the control and test groups.
Results: The mean initial failure SBS for the test group was significantly higher than that of the control
group (p < 0.001). Of the control group samples, 80% failed adhesively, while 100% of the test group
samples showed cohesive failure and a mixed mode of failure when observed under the
stereomicroscope.
Conclusion: Single Bond Universal adhesive provides more reliable bond strength for repaired
composite resin restorations compared with two-step silane and bonding agent application.