Effect of different surface treatments on shear bond strength of ceramic brackets to old composite

Background At present, the demand for orthodontic treatment is on the rise. On the other hand, evidence shows that the bond strength of composite resins to old composite restorations is often unreliable. Therefore, the aim of this in vitro study was to assess the effect of different surface treatments on shear bond strength (SBS) of ceramic brackets to old composite restorations. Methods In this in vitro experimental study, 60 nano-hybrid composite discs were fabricated. For aging, the discs were incubated in deionized water at 37 °C for 1 month. Next, they underwent 4 different surface treatments namely acid etching with 37% phosphoric acid, sandblasting, grinding, and Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation. Ceramic brackets were then bonded to the discs and underwent SBS testing. Results The maximum mean SBS value was obtained in the grinding group (9.16 ± 2.49 MPa), followed by the sandblasting (8.13 ± 2.58 MPa) and laser (6.57 ± 1.45 MPa) groups. The minimum mean SBS value was noted in the control group (5.07 ± 2.14 MPa). Conclusion All groups except for the control group showed clinically acceptable SBS. Therefore, grinding, sandblasting, and Er,Cr:YSGG laser are suggested as effective surface treatments for bonding of ceramic orthodontic brackets to aged composite.

The influence of different surface treatment protocols and bonding agents on the repair microtensile bond strength of six-month’ aged composite: An in vitro study

Objective: to compare the effect of three surface treatment protocols and two intermediate agents on repairing aged composite, regarding microtensile bond strength (µTBS) and mode of fracture, at two time intervals. Material and methods: Six-month aged microhybrid composite blocks, were randomly distributed into three groups, subjected to; Fine, Super Fine grit diamond burs or Erbium- Yag Laser surface treatment. Each block had both One Coat bond SL (Bond) and Brilliant Flow flowable composite (Flow) intermediate agents, alongside. Blocks were incrementally repaired using nanohybrid composite, cut into beams, then randomly subjected either immediately (IM) to µTBS test or after thermocycling (TC) for 5000 cycle. Mode of failure was determined using stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed through three-way ANOVA followed by pairwise comparison with Bonferroni correction. Kruskal Wallis test compared groups for failure mode analysis (?=0.05)Results: Super Fine grit showed the highest mean µTBS compared to control for both intermediate agents, IM and after TC at P<0.05. No difference between Fine grit and Laser application for all groups (P>0.05). IM, Bond showed the highest µTBS compared to TC, Flow for all tested groups. Beams roughened with Fine and Super Fine burs showed significantly lower adhesive failures than those roughened with Laser. Flow suffers significantly higher adhesive failure than those with Bond. For TC tested groups; beams with Super Fine bur and Bond showed significantly lower adhesive failure at P=0.029.Conclusions: Super Fine grit and Bond provide the highest µTBS and the least adhesive failure; moreover TC resulted in significant decrease in µTBS.

Influences of Successive Exposure to Bleaching and Fluoride Preparations on the Surface Hardness and Roughness of the Aged Resin Composite Restoratives

Background and Objectives: Surfaces of composite restorations are adversely affected upon bleaching and topical fluoride application. Such a procedure is normally carried out in the presence of restorations already serving in a different oral environment, although previous in vitro studies only considered the freshly-prepared composite specimens for assessment. The current study accordingly aimed to evaluate both the surface hardness and roughness of aged composite restoratives following their successive exposure to bleaching and topical fluoride preparations. Materials and Methods: Disc specimens were prepared from micro-hybrid, nano-filled, flowable and bulk-fill resin composites (groups 1–4, n = 60 each). All specimens were subjected to artificial aging before their intermittent exposure to surface treatment with: none (control), bleach or topical fluoride (subgroups 1–3, n = 20). All surface treatments were interrupted with two periods of 5000 thermal cycles. Specimens’ surfaces were then tested for both surface hardness (Vickers hardness number (VHN), n = 10) and roughness (Ra, n = 10). The collected VHNs and Ras were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s comparisons at α = 0.05 to confirm the significance of differences between subgroups. Results: None of the tested composites showed differences in surface hardness and roughness between the bleached and the non-treated specimens (p > 0.05), but the bleached flowable composite specimens only were rougher than their control (p < 0.000126). In comparison to the control, fluoride treatment not only reduced the surface hardness of both micro-hybrid (p = 0.000129) and flowable (p = 0.0029) composites, but also increased the surface roughness of all tested composites (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Aged composite restoratives provide minimal surface alterations on successive bleaching and fluoride applications. Flowable resin composite is the most affected by such procedures. Although bleaching seems safe for other types of composites, the successive fluoride application could deteriorate the aged surfaces of the tested resin composites.

Effect of Tribochemical Coating on Composite Repair Strength

Clinical Relevance Tribochemical treatment of existing composite surfaces is highly effective for composite repair. When repairing an old composite restoration, the clinician should try to use the same composite originally used for the restoration. If the information about the original restoration is not known, a composite with strong mechanical properties should be used for the repair restoration. SUMMARY This study evaluated the effect of tribochemical coating on composite-to-composite repair interfacial fracture toughness (iFT). Sixty beam-shaped specimens (21×4×3 ± 0.2 mm) were prepared with a nanofill composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra [FSU]) and a nanohybrid composite (Clearfil Majesty ES-2 [CME]) and aged for 50,000 thermocycles (5°C-55°C, 20-second dwell time) and then sectioned in half. The resulting 120 hemispecimens (60 for each composite) were randomly assigned to different repair methods (n=10): universal adhesive (Clearfil Universal Bond Quick [CUB]), sand-blasting followed by CUB, or tribochemical coating (CoJet, CoJet sand, Espe-Sil, and Visio-Bond). The repair surface was prepared with a diamond bur (Midwest #471271), rinsed, and dried. Each aged composite brand (FSU, CME) was repaired with either the same composite or the opposite composite. All adhesives and composites were light cured with a high-irradiance LED curing light (Elipar DeepCure-S). After postrepair storage in 100% humidity and at 37°C for 24 hours, iFT was measured as KIc (MPa m½). Data were analyzed for statistical significance using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey honest significant difference post hoc test (α=0.05). Regardless of the substrate composite, ANOVA showed significant differences for surface treatment (p&lt;0.0001) and repair composite (p&lt;0.0001). Mean iFT values (SD) ranged from 0.91 (0.10) MPa·m½ to 2.68 (0.12) MPa·m½. Repairs made with FSU after CoJet resulted in significantly higher iFT (FSU: 2.68 MPa·m½; CME: 2.21 MPa·m½) when compared to the other experimental groups. The repair iFT was higher with CoJet treatment and when the nanofill composite FSU was used as the repair composite.

Grinding of composite cores using diamond burs with different grit sizes

Aim: To evaluate the retention of Y-TZP crowns cemented in aged composite cores ground with burs of different grit sizes. Methods: Sixty composite resin simplified full-crown preparations were scanned, while 60 Y-TZP crowns with occlusal retentions were milled. The composite preparations were stored for 120 days (wet environment-37°C) and randomly distributed into three groups (n=20) according to the type of composite core surface treatment. The groups were defined as: CTRL (control: No treatment), EFB (extra-fine diamond bur [25μm]), and CB (coarse diamond bur [107μm]). The grinding was performed with an adapted surveyor standardizing the speed and pressure of the grinding. The intaglio surfaces on the crowns were air-abraded with silica-coated alumina particles (30 μm) and then a silane was applied. The crowns were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement, thermocycled (12,000 cycles; 5/55°C), stored (120 days) and submitted to aretention test (0.5mm/min). The retentive strength data (MPa) were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test, as well as Weibull analysis. Failures were classified as 50C (above 50% of cement in the crown), 50S (above 50% of cement in the substrate) and COE (composite core cohesive failure). Results: No statistical difference was observed among the retention values (p=0.975). However, a higher Weibull modulus was observed in the CTRL group. The predominant type of failure was 50S (above 50% of cement in the substrate composite). Conclusion: The retention of zirconia crowns was not affected by grinding using diamond burs with different grit sizes (coarse/extra-fine) or when no grinding was performed.