J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci.  2016 Dec;32(4):293-300. 10.14368/jdras.2016.32.4.293.

Chemical compatibility of interim material and bonding agent on shear bond strength

• Lee J

• KMID: 2369069
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2016.32.4.293

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is finding proper bonding agents to be used when adding bis-acryl composite provisional materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Three bonding agents with different chemical compositions were included in this study. Forty disk shaped specimens of bis-acryl composite provisional material were prepared and divided into 4 groups according to the bonding agents. Control group didn't have bonding agent. Through the Teflon mould with 4.0 mm diameter hole with 4.0 mm thickness the same bis-acryl composite provisional material was added on the disks after the surface of each specimen was treated with designated bonding agent according to the manufacturer's instructions. Shear bond test was performed and the fractured surfaces were inspected with a microscope. One-way analysis of variance was conducted and the result was further analysed with Turkey post hoc test at the significance level of 0.05.
RESULTS
The highest strength was acquired from the specimens bonded with chemical cure system and it was statistically significant (P < 0.05). This group showed 100% cohesive failures. The lowest bonding strength was recorded from the specimens used conventional light cure bonding agent, and this group's result was similar with the control group. The group used a light cure bonding agent claiming improved compatibility revealed significantly higher bond strength to the traditional light cure bonding agent group in a statistically significant way (P = 0.043).
CONCLUSION
According to the bonding agent used the shear bond strength was significantly affected. Therefore the choice of proper bonding agent is important when hiring a bonding agent to add bis-acryl composite provisional materials.

Keyword

bis-acryl composite provisional material; provisional restoration; shear bond strength; bonding agent

MeSH Terms

Polytetrafluoroethylene
Turkey
Polytetrafluoroethylene

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Specimen before shear bond strength test. Bisacryl provisional material specimen was embedded in clear acrylic resin to be hold by special jig.

• 

  Fig. 2 Schematic drawing of shear bond strength test. Load was applied at bonding interface.

• 

  Fig. 3 Shear bond strengths of groups are compared and statistically analysed. According to the Turkey post hoc test results, *1 denotes significantly different from the others at the significance level of 0.05. *2 denotes significant difference between groups at the significance level of 0.05. CO, control; CF, CLEARFIL; SB, Single bond 2; OS, ONE-STEP.

Reference

References

1. Federick DR. The provisional fixed partial denture. J Prosthet Dent. 1975; 34:520–6. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(75)90039-6.

2. Vahidi F. The provisional restoration. Dent Clin North Am. 1987; 31:363–81. PMID: 3301433.

3. Burns DR, Beck DA, Nelson SK. A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90:474–97. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00259-2.

4. Wang RL, Moore BK, Goodacre CJ, Swartz ML, Andres CJ. A comparison of resins for fabricating provisional fixed restorations. Int J Prosthodont. 1989; 2:173–84. PMID: 2597302.

5. Zwetchkenbaum S, Weiner S, Dastane A, Vaidyanathan TK. Effects of relining on long-term marginal stability of provisional crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1995; 73:525–9. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80110-6.

6. Bohnenkamp DM, Garcia LT. Repair of bis-acryl provisional restorations using flowable composite resin. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 92:500–2. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.08.017.

7. Chen HL, Lai YL, Chou IC, Hu CJ, Lee SY. Shear bond strength of provisional restoration materials repaired with light-cured resins. Oper Dent. 2008; 33:508–15. DOI: 10.2341/07-130. PMID: 18833857.

8. Hammond BD, Cooper JR 3rd, Lazarchik DA. Predictable repair of provisional restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2009; 21:19–24. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2008.00225.x. PMID: 19207453.

9. Tjan AH, Castelnuovo J, Shiotsu G. Marginal fidelity of crowns fabricated from six proprietary provisional materials. J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77:482–5. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70140-9.

10. Young HM, Smith CT, Morton D. Comparative in vitro evaluation of two provisional restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 85:129–32. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2001.112797. PMID: 11208201.

11. Driscoll CF, Woolsey G, Ferguson WM. Comparison of exothermic release during polymerization of four materials used to fabricate interim restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 65:504–6. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90289-9.

12. Koumjian JH, Nimmo A. Evaluation of fracture resistance of resins used for provisional restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 64:654–7. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(90)90290-S.

13. Balkenhol M, Meyer M, Michel K, Ferger P, Wöstmann B. Effect of surface condition and storage time on the repairability of temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials. J Dent. 2008; 36:86172. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.06.006. PMID: 18691795.

14. Hagge MS, Lindemuth JS, Jones AG. Shear bond strength of bis-acryl composite provisional material repaired with flowable composite. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2002; 14:47–52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2002.tb00147.x. PMID: 11915395.

15. Lee J, Lee S. Evaluation of add-on methods for bis-acryl composite resin interim restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:594–601. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.02.020. PMID: 25979444.

16. Eliades GC, Caputo AA. The strength of layering technique in visible light-cured composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 61:31–8. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90104-2.

17. Brosh T, Pilo R, Bichacho N, Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77:122–6. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70224-5.

18. Shahdad SA, Kennedy JG. Bond strength of re-paired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study. J Dent. 1998; 26:685–94. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00044-4.

19. Tay FR, King NM, Suh BI, Pashley DH. Effect of delayed activation of light-cured resin composites on bonding of all-in-one adhesives. J Adhes Dent. 2001; 3:207–25. PMID: 11803709.

20. Sanares AM, Itthagarun A, King NM, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Adverse surface interactions between one-bottle light-cured adhesives and chemicalcured composites. Dent Mater. 2001; 17:542–56. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00016-1.

21. Truffier-Boutry D, Place E, Devaux J, Leloup G. Interfacial layer characterization in dental composite. J Oral Rehabil. 2003; 30:74–7. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01008.x. PMID: 12485387.

22. Suh BI. Oxygen-inhibited layer in adhesion dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2004; 16:316–23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2004.tb00060.x. PMID: 15726800.

23. Franco EB, Lopes LG, D’Alpino PH, Pereira JC. Influence of pH of different adhesive systems on the polymerization of a chemically cured composite resin. Braz Dent J. 2005; 16:107–11. DOI: 10.1590/S0103-64402005000200004. PMID: 16475603.

24. Dall’Oca S, Papacchini F, Goracci C, Cury AH, Suh BI, Tay FR, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Effect of oxygen inhibition on composite repair strength over time. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007; 81:493–8. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30689. PMID: 17034010.

25. Rinastiti M, Ozcan M, Siswomihardjo W, Busscher HJ. Immediate repair bond strengths of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites after different surface treatments. J Dent. 2010; 38:29–38. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.009. PMID: 19735692.

26. Jafarzadeh Kashi TS, Erfan M, Rakhshan V, Aghabaigi N, Tabatabaei FS. An in vitro assessment of the effects of three surface treatments on repair bond strength of aged composites. Oper Dent. 2011; 36:608–17. DOI: 10.2341/10-386-L. PMID: 21859313.