Evaluation of Bond Strength Between New and Old Composite Resin Restorations Using Two Universal Bonding Agents
Document Type : Original Articles
Authors
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
3 Postgraduate Student of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Science, Isfahan, Iran
4 Dentist, private practice, Shahrekord, Iran
Abstract
Introduction: With the increasing use of composite restorations for dental aesthetics, achieving a stable bond between old and new composite materials is challenging due to the gradual degradation of the previous materials. This study aimed to evaluate the bond strength between old and new resin composite restorations using two universal bonding agents, G2 Bond and Clearfil SE Bond.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in 2023 at Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences. Forty G-ænial composite discs (2×8 mm) were prepared and subjected to 10000 thermal cycles to simulate one year of aging. After etching and rinsing, each bonding agent was applied to 20 samples. A second layer of composite (2×6 mm) was placed in molds and cured. From each group, 10 samples were stored in water for two weeks, and the other 10 samples underwent further thermal cycling. Shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine, and data were analyzed using Independent and Paired T-Tests (P < 0.05 significant).
Results: The mean shear bond strength of both bonding agents showed no significant difference after two weeks and one year (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: Both G2 Bond and Clearfil SE Bond provided adequate bond strength between old and new composite restorations (9.02 to 11.08 MPa), meeting ISO 10477 standards. No significant difference was observed between immediate and aged results. These bonding agents, combined with proper surface preparation, are reliable options for composite restorations.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in 2023 at Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences. Forty G-ænial composite discs (2×8 mm) were prepared and subjected to 10000 thermal cycles to simulate one year of aging. After etching and rinsing, each bonding agent was applied to 20 samples. A second layer of composite (2×6 mm) was placed in molds and cured. From each group, 10 samples were stored in water for two weeks, and the other 10 samples underwent further thermal cycling. Shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine, and data were analyzed using Independent and Paired T-Tests (P < 0.05 significant).
Results: The mean shear bond strength of both bonding agents showed no significant difference after two weeks and one year (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: Both G2 Bond and Clearfil SE Bond provided adequate bond strength between old and new composite restorations (9.02 to 11.08 MPa), meeting ISO 10477 standards. No significant difference was observed between immediate and aged results. These bonding agents, combined with proper surface preparation, are reliable options for composite restorations.
Keywords
- Gomes G, Perdigão J. Prefabricated composite resin veneers: a clinical review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014; 26(5): 302-13.
- Ritter A, Boushell L, Walter R. Sturdevant’s art and science of operative dentistry. 6th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2019.
- Özcan M, Pekkan G. Effect of different adhesion strategies on bond strength of resin composite to composite-dentin complex. Oper Dent 2013; 38(1): 63-72.
- Fornazari IA, Wille I, Meda Em, Brum Rt, Souza Em. Effect of surface treatment, silane, and universal adhesive on microshear bond strength of nanofilled composite repairs. Oper Dent 2017; 42(4): 367-74.
- Rinastiti M, Özcan M, Siswomihardjo W, Busscher HJ. Immediate repair bond strengths of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites after different surface treatments. J Dent 2010; 38(1): 29-38.
- Flury S, Dulla FA, Peutzfeldt A. Repair bond strength of resin composite to restorative materials after short- and long-term storage. Dent Mater 2019; 35(9): 1205-31.
- Willers AE, Almeida Ayres AP, Hirata R, Giannini M. Effect of universal adhesive application on bond strength of four-year aged composite repair. J Adhes Sci Technol 202; 36(1): 1823-33.
- van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, van Landuyt K, Yoshida Y, Peumans M. From Buonocore’s pioneering acid-etch technique to self-adhering restoratives: a status perspective of rapidly advancing dental adhesive technology. J Adhes Dent 2020; 22(1): 7-34.
- Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 2005; 21(9): 864-81.
- Jang JH, Lee MG, Woo SU, Lee CO, Yi JK, Kim DS. Comparative study of the dentin bond strength of a new universal adhesive. Dent Mater J 2016; 35(4): 606-12.
- GC Corporation. GC Dental. [Accessed 2020] Available from: gc.dental.com.
- Kuraray Noritake. CLEARFIL Universal Bond. [Published 2019] Available from: kuraraynoritake.com..
- Valente LL, Sarkis-Onofre R, Goncalves AP, Fernandez E, Loomans B, Moraes RR. Repair bond strength of dental composites: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Adhes Adhes 2016; 69: 15-62.
- Ibrahim IM, Elkassas DW, Yousry MM. Effect of EDTA pretreatment and phosphoric acid on the bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives to ground enamel. Eur J Dent 2010; 4(4): 418-82.
- Staxrud F, Dahl JE. Role of bonding agents in the repair of composite resin restorations. Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119(4): 316-22.
- Ivanovas S, Hickel R, Ilie N. How to repair fillings made by silorane-based composites. Clin Oral Investig 2011; 15: 915-22.
- Kanzow P, Wiegand A, Goestemeyer G, Schwendicke F. Understanding the management and teaching of dental restoration repair: systematic review and meta-analysis of surveys. J Dent 2018; 69: 1-21.
- Oh HK, Shin DH. Effect of adhesive application method on repair bond strength of composite. Restor Dent Endod 2021; 46(3): e25.
- Eliasson ST, Dahl JE. Effect of curing and silanizing on composite repair bond strength using an improved micro-tensile test method. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand 2017; 3(1): 21-9.
- Nematianaraki S, Banav S, Valaee N, Korkeabadi H. Comparing the effect of three self-etching bondings on human dentin shear bond strength and microleakage. Res Dent Sci 2010; 7(3): 30-6.
- Staxrud F, Valen H. Potential of “universal” bonding agents for composite repair. Biomater Investig Dent 2022; 9(1): 41-6.
- Blum IR, Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Factors influencing repair of dental restorations with resin composite. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2014; 6: 81-7.
- Tyas MJ, Anusavice KJ, Frencken JE, Mount GJ. Minimal intervention dentistry: a review. FDI Commission Project 1-97. Int Dent J 2000; 50(1): 1-12.
- Chuenweravanich J, Kuphasuk W, Saikaew P, Sattabanasuk V. Bond durability of a repaired resin composite using a universal adhesive and different surface treatments. J Adhes Dent 2022; 24(1): 67-76.
- Cavalcanti AN, De Lima AF, Peris AR, Mitsui FHO, Marchi GM. Effect of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19(2):90-8.
- Ensafi F, Hooshmand T, Pirmoradian M. Evaluation of microtensile bond strength of repaired dental resin composite using different surface treatment techniques: a laboratory study [in Persian]. J Dent Med 2019; 32(1): 29-39.
- Sadaghiani M, Basir Shabestari S, Kazemi Yazdi H, Saghafi F, Farahani AR. Comparative study of the effect of two bonding agents on the shear bond strength of repaired composite restorations. J Dent 2011; 11(4): 282-8.
- Ghavam M, Naeemi M, Hashemikamangar SS, Ebrahimi H, Kharazifard MJ. Repair bond strength of composite: effect of surface treatment and type of composite. J Clin Exp Dent 2018; 10(6): e520-5.
)