+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of composite indirect restorations bonded to dentin treated with adhesive and low-viscosity composite



Marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of composite indirect restorations bonded to dentin treated with adhesive and low-viscosity composite



Dental Materials 23(3): 279-287



This study evaluated the marginal adaptation of composite indirect restorations bonded with dual curing resin cement after different strategies to seal dentin. Different bonding techniques associated or not with a low-viscosity composite resin (LVCR) were utilized. In addition, the bond strength between composite resin and pre-sealed dentin was evaluated in the buccal and pulpal walls of class I cavities, prepared for indirect restorations. Thirty-three freshly extracted human molars were used for this study, divided into three groups (n=11) representing different techniques to seal dentin-(Group 1) Conventional technique: the adhesive system was applied and polymerized just before the cementation of the indirect restoration; (Group 2) Dual bonding technique: a first layer of the adhesive system was applied and polymerized just after preparation, and a second layer just before the final cementation; (Group 3) Resin coating technique: a LVCR was applied and polymerized after the first layer of the adhesive system, and before the impression. A further application of the adhesive system was performed before the placement of the restoration. The restorations were polished and a solution of acid red propylene-glycol was dropped on each specimen's occlusal surface for 10 s. The dye penetrations were captured under stereoscopic lens and the images were transferred to a computer with a measurement program, in order to determine the extension of the dye penetration. The microtensile bond strength test (muTBS) was applied on pulpal (P) and buccal (B) walls of the restorations for Groups 1-3. The subgroups for muTBS were: Group 1P (n=13); Group 1B (n=7); Group 2P (n=6); Group 2B (n=14); Group 3P (n=14); Group 3B (n=15). All specimens were sectioned to obtain an area of 0.8 mm2. The specimens were mounted on a microtensile device and fractured using a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1mm/min. Failure modes were analyzed by SEM. One-way ANOVA and multiple-comparison Tukey's test were used for statistical analysis of the marginal adaptation scores and muTBS test. Non-parametrical Kruskal-Wallis test was used for failure mode analysis. Group 3 showed a significantly higher mean value of marginal dye penetration (45.59) when compared to Groups 1 (8.44) and 2 (18.92). For pulpal walls, Group 1P showed significantly higher mean muTBS (25.93+/-2.27) when compared to Groups 2P (14.71+/-1.78) and 3P (16.07+/-2.81). There was no statistical difference between Groups 2P and 3P. For buccal walls, Group 2B presented significantly higher mean muTBS (23.29+/-1.42), and Group 1B the lowest mean values (11.37+/-1.14). The failure mode analysis presented a considerable variation, according to the treatment and to the wall. The results of this study indicated that a previous sealing of dentin using the adhesive system, followed by a second application just before the cementation, is an effective alternative technique, since it maintains the marginal adaptation of indirect composite resin restorations, and improves the bond strength at the interface on buccal walls, which are the most critical regions for the long-term durability of these procedures.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 049531415

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 16546249

DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.01.028


Related references

Contemporary adhesives: marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of class II composite restorations. American Journal of Dentistry 25(3): 181-188, 2012

Association between microtensile bond strength and leakage in the indirect resin composite/dentin adhesively bonded joint. Journal of Dentistry 29(2): 145-153, 2001

The influence of luting systems on the microtensile bond strength of dentin to indirect resin-based composite and ceramic restorations. Operative Dentistry 34(3): 328-336, 2009

In vitro marginal adaptation of high-viscosity resin composite restorations bonded to dentin cavities. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 6(1): 49-53, 2004

The effect of dentin adhesive and cure mode on film thickness and microtensile bond strength to dentin in indirect restorations. Operative Dentistry 30(1): 50-57, 2005

Effect of cyclic loading on marginal adaptation and bond strength in direct vs. indirect class II MO composite restorations. Operative Dentistry 33(5): 587-592, 2008

Microtensile bond strengths to cavity floor dentin in indirect composite restorations using resin coating. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 19(1): 38-46; Discussion 47-8, 2007

Effect of Different Adhesive Strategies and Time on Microtensile Bond Strength of a CAD/CAM Composite to Dentin. Operative Dentistry 2018, 2018

In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases and interface treatments. "Post-fatigue adaptation of indirect composite restorations". Clinical Oral Investigations 16(5): 1385-1393, 2015

Microtensile bond strength distributions of three composite materials with different polymerization shrinkages bonded to dentin. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 13(1): 39-48, 2011

Microtensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to caries-affected dentin with three adhesives. Operative Dentistry 32(1): 24-30, 2007

Influence of resin composite mechanical properties on adhesive microtensile bond strength to dentin. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 13(4): 323-331, 2011

Microtensile bond strength of silorane-based resin composite and its corresponding adhesive in Class I occlusal restorations. American Journal of Dentistry 24(6): 346-353, 2012

Class II composite resin restorations with two polymerization techniques: relationship between microtensile bond strength and marginal leakage. Journal of Dentistry 33(7): 603-610, 2005

Effect of deproteinization and tubular occlusion on microtensile bond strength and marginal microleakage of resin composite restorations. Journal of Applied Oral Science 17(5): 462-466, 2010