Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkey.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024 Jun;36(6):930-940. doi: 10.1111/jerd.13215. Epub 2024 Mar 4.
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different surface treatments on the repair bond strength between a fiber-reinforced dentin composite and a posterior composite.
Forty fiber-reinforced dentin composite resin blocks (4 mm × 4 mm × 4 mm) were separated into eight groups (n = 5) according to the surface preparation methods: (G1) negative control group, (G2) adhesive application, (G3) 50% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) application, (G4) 50% DMSO + adhesive application, (G5) 37% phosphoric acid etch + adhesive application, (G6) air abrasion + adhesive application, (G7) 37% phosphoric acid etch + 50% DMSO application + adhesive application, and (G8) air abrasion +50% DMSO application + adhesive application group. The composite surfaces were repaired in two layers with a posterior composite. Composite sticks were subjected to a micro tensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a stereomicroscope (×25). Short fiber-reinforced composite samples' surfaces were investigated by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Shapiro Wilk, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey HSD tests were used for statistical evaluation.
The highest average (μTBS) values were observed in G8, whereas the lowest mean μTBS values were evident in the G1 group. Statistically significant μTBS values were found in all adhesive-applied groups when compared with the negative control group. Notably, the application of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not lead to a statistically significant increase in μTBS values. SEM images demonstrated that acid etching partially eliminated residues on the composite surface, while air abrasion had a detrimental effect on the integrity of fiber structures.
In the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite with a posterior composite, adhesive application is an effective approach. The treatment of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not confer a statistically significant advantage, and the supplemental use of acid etch or air abrasion did not show an additional benefit compared to adhesive-only repairs.
Adhesive application emerges as a potent and effective strategy for the repair of bur-roughened fiber-reinforced dentin composites. With its limitations, the study highlights the efficacy of adhesive-only repairs without the necessity for additional surface treatments.
本研究旨在评估不同表面处理方法对纤维增强牙本质复合材料与后牙复合材料之间修复粘结强度的影响。
将 40 个纤维增强牙本质复合材料树脂块（4mm×4mm×4mm）根据表面处理方法分为 8 组（n=5）：（G1）阴性对照组、（G2）应用粘结剂、（G3）应用 50%二甲基亚砜（DMSO）、（G4）应用 50%DMSO+粘结剂、（G5）应用 37%磷酸酸蚀+粘结剂、（G6）空气喷砂+粘结剂、（G7）应用 37%磷酸酸蚀+50%DMSO+粘结剂、（G8）空气喷砂+50%DMSO+粘结剂。在后牙复合材料上以两层形式修复复合材料表面。对复合材料棒进行微拉伸粘结强度（μTBS）测试。使用立体显微镜（×25）评估断裂表面。使用扫描电子显微镜（SEM）观察短纤维增强复合材料样品的表面。使用 Shapiro-Wilk、单因素方差分析和 Tukey HSD 检验进行统计评估。
G8 组的平均（μTBS）值最高，而 G1 组的平均（μTBS）值最低。与阴性对照组相比，所有应用粘结剂的组的 μTBS 值均有显著差异。值得注意的是，不应用粘结剂而应用 50%DMSO 并没有导致 μTBS 值有统计学上的显著增加。SEM 图像表明，酸蚀部分消除了复合材料表面的残留物，而空气喷砂对纤维结构的完整性有不利影响。
在后牙复合材料修复纤维增强牙本质复合材料时，应用粘结剂是一种有效的方法。不应用粘结剂而应用 50%DMSO 的处理方法并没有带来统计学上的显著优势，与单独应用粘结剂相比，酸蚀或空气喷砂的附加应用并没有显示出额外的益处。
应用粘结剂是修复粗化纤维增强牙本质复合材料的有效且有力的策略。研究有其局限性，突出了单独应用粘结剂的有效性，而无需额外的表面处理。
