Effect of surface conditioning methods, adhesive systems and resin composite on repair strength of dimethacrylate and silorane resin composites

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorid0000-0001-5348-6954
dc.contributor.authorLima, Adriano Fonseca
dc.contributor.authorLeite, Thatiana de Vicente
dc.contributor.authorPalialol, Alan Muniz
dc.contributor.authorCatelan, Anderson
dc.contributor.authorBaggio Aguiar, Flavio Henrique
dc.contributor.authorMarchi, Giselle Maria
dc.contributor.authorYüzbaşıoğlu, Emir
dc.contributor.authorÖzcan, Mutlu
dc.date.accessioned10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T19:57:14Z
dc.date.available10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.available2019-07-10T19:57:14Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Protetik Diş Tedavisi Ana Bilim Dalı
dc.descriptionWOS: 000379138300009
dc.description.abstractThis study evaluated the effect of surface conditioning methods and adhesive systems on the repair bond strength of resin composites. Specimens (FLS: Filtek LS) (N = 144) were prepared using a silicone matrix. The specimens were stored in distilled water and then were randomly divided into the twelve groups (n = 12) according to the surface conditioning method (unground or diamond bur) and adhesive system (no adhesive, LS: Filtek LS, AS: Adper Scotchbond SE Plus) and resin composite (FLS: Filtek LS; FS: Filtek Supreme). The specimens were fixed in an hourglass-shaped silicone matrix and the other half of the specimen was restored. Hourglass-shaped specimens (n = 12) were used as positive control to measure the cohesive strength of the resin composite (Filtek LS). Microtensile bond test was performed (0.5 mm/min) and failure types were analyzed. Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance, Tukey's and Dunnett's tests (alpha = 0.05). Adhesive protocol and resin composite significantly affected the results (p < 0.05). For the FS composite, the highest results were obtained using LS adhesive with (18.4 +/- 7.7) and without (18.8 +/- 4.8) bur roughening. For FLS composite, the highest results were obtained using AS adhesive with (33.2 +/- 7.1) and without (25.7 +/- 3.6) bur roughening. Without the use of adhesive resin, significantly lower bond strength results were observed with both LS (5 +/- 2.1, 4.5 +/- 1.5) and FLS (2.2 +/- 1.2, 4.4 +/- 1.1) for unground and diamond bur roughened groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). Cohesive strength of the FLS (52.3 +/- 7.6) was significantly higher than any of the repaired groups (p < 0.0001). FS-LS combination and the groups repaired without adhesive presented more adhesive (Type I) failures.
dc.identifier.citationLima, A. F., Leite, T. V., Palialol, A. M., Catelan, A., Baggio Aguiar, F. H., Marchi, G. M. ... Özcan, M. (2016). Effect of surface conditioning methods, adhesive systems and resin composite on repair strength of dimethacrylate and silorane resin composites. Journal Of Adhesion Science And Technology, 30(24), 2736-2744. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2016.1199217
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/01694243.2016.1199217
dc.identifier.endpage2744
dc.identifier.issn0169-4243
dc.identifier.issn1568-5616
dc.identifier.issue24
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage2736
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2016.1199217
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/2929
dc.identifier.volume30
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Ltd
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of Adhesion Science And Technologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectAdhesion
dc.subjectAdhesive System
dc.subjectBond Strength
dc.subjectResin Composite
dc.subjectRepair
dc.subjectSilorane
dc.subjectSurface Conditioning
dc.titleEffect of surface conditioning methods, adhesive systems and resin composite on repair strength of dimethacrylate and silorane resin composites
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
Yuzbasıoglu-Emir 2016.pdf
Boyut:
687.71 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Makale Koleksiyonu
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu