J Adv Prosthodont.  2020 Jun;12(3):131-139. 10.4047/jap.2020.12.3.131.

Repair bond strength of resin composite to three aged CAD/CAM blocks using different repair systems

• Gul P
• Altınok-Uygun L

• KMID: 2504121
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.3.131

Abstract

PURPOSE
. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the repair bond strength of a nanohybrid resin composite to three CAD/CAM blocks using different intraoral ceramic repair systems.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
. Three CAD/CAM blocks (Lava Ultimate, Cerasmart, and Vitablocks Mark II) were selected for the study. Thirty-two specimens were fabricated from each block. Specimens were randomly divided into eight groups for the following different intraoral repair systems: Group 1: control group (no treatment); Group 2: 34.5% phosphoric acid etching; Group 3: CoJet System; Group 4: Z-Prime Plus System; Group 5: GC Repair System; Group 6: Cimara System; Group 7: Porcelain Repair System; and Group 8: Clearfil Repair System. Then, nanohybrid resin composite (Tetric Evo Ceram) was packed onto treated blocks surfaces. The specimens were thermocycled before application of repair systems and after application of composite resin. After second thermal cycling, blocks were cut into bars (1 × 1 × 12 mm³) for microtensile bond strength tests. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (α=.05).
RESULTS
. Cimara System, Porcelain Repair, and Clearfil Repair systems significantly increased the bond strength of nanohybrid resin composite to all CAD/CAM blocks when compared with the other tested repair systems (P<.05). In terms of CAD/CAM blocks, the lowest values were observed in Vitablocks Mark II groups (P<.05).
CONCLUSION
. All repair systems used in the study exhibited clinically acceptable bond strength and can be recommended for clinical use.

Keyword

CAD/CAM materials; Composite resin; Intraoral repair systems; Microtensile bond strenght