Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength
This study investigates the effect of defined working distances between the tip of a sandblasting device and a resin composite surface on the composite–composite repair bond strength. Resin composite specimens (Ceram.x Spectra ST (HV); Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany) were aged by thermal cycling...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | Materials |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/7/1621 |
| _version_ | 1797539909523734528 |
|---|---|
| author | Phoebe Burrer Amanda Costermani Matej Par Thomas Attin Tobias T. Tauböck |
| author_facet | Phoebe Burrer Amanda Costermani Matej Par Thomas Attin Tobias T. Tauböck |
| author_sort | Phoebe Burrer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study investigates the effect of defined working distances between the tip of a sandblasting device and a resin composite surface on the composite–composite repair bond strength. Resin composite specimens (Ceram.x Spectra ST (HV); Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany) were aged by thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5–55 °C) and one week of water storage. Mechanical surface conditioning of the substrate surfaces was performed by sandblasting with aluminum oxide particles (50 µm, 3 bar, 10 s) from varying working distances of 1, 5, 10, and 15 mm. Specimens were then silanized and restored by application of an adhesive system and repair composite material (Ceram.x Spectra ST (HV)). In the negative control group, no mechanical surface pretreatment or silanization was performed. Directly applied inherent increments served as the positive control group (<i>n</i> = 8). After thermal cycling of all groups, microtensile repair bond strength was assessed, and surfaces were additionally characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). The negative control group reached the significantly lowest microtensile bond strength of all groups. No significant differences in repair bond strength were observed within the groups with varying sandblasting distances. Composite surfaces sandblasted from a distance of 1 mm or 5 mm showed no difference in repair bond strength compared to the positive control group, whereas distances of 10 or 15 mm revealed significantly higher repair bond strengths than the inherent incremental bond strength (positive control group). In conclusion, all sandblasted test groups achieved similar or higher repair bond strength than the inherent incremental bond strength, indicating that irrespective of the employed working distance between the sandblasting device and the composite substrate surface, repair restorations can be successfully performed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T12:52:30Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b63444db7e07460dbfc1c0f924cf63d1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1996-1944 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T12:52:30Z |
| publishDate | 2021-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Materials |
| spelling | doaj.art-b63444db7e07460dbfc1c0f924cf63d12023-11-21T12:10:23ZengMDPI AGMaterials1996-19442021-03-01147162110.3390/ma14071621Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond StrengthPhoebe Burrer0Amanda Costermani1Matej Par2Thomas Attin3Tobias T. Tauböck4Clinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, 8032 Zurich, SwitzerlandClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, 8032 Zurich, SwitzerlandDepartment of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gundulićeva 5, 10000 Zagreb, CroatiaClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, 8032 Zurich, SwitzerlandClinic of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, 8032 Zurich, SwitzerlandThis study investigates the effect of defined working distances between the tip of a sandblasting device and a resin composite surface on the composite–composite repair bond strength. Resin composite specimens (Ceram.x Spectra ST (HV); Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany) were aged by thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5–55 °C) and one week of water storage. Mechanical surface conditioning of the substrate surfaces was performed by sandblasting with aluminum oxide particles (50 µm, 3 bar, 10 s) from varying working distances of 1, 5, 10, and 15 mm. Specimens were then silanized and restored by application of an adhesive system and repair composite material (Ceram.x Spectra ST (HV)). In the negative control group, no mechanical surface pretreatment or silanization was performed. Directly applied inherent increments served as the positive control group (<i>n</i> = 8). After thermal cycling of all groups, microtensile repair bond strength was assessed, and surfaces were additionally characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). The negative control group reached the significantly lowest microtensile bond strength of all groups. No significant differences in repair bond strength were observed within the groups with varying sandblasting distances. Composite surfaces sandblasted from a distance of 1 mm or 5 mm showed no difference in repair bond strength compared to the positive control group, whereas distances of 10 or 15 mm revealed significantly higher repair bond strengths than the inherent incremental bond strength (positive control group). In conclusion, all sandblasted test groups achieved similar or higher repair bond strength than the inherent incremental bond strength, indicating that irrespective of the employed working distance between the sandblasting device and the composite substrate surface, repair restorations can be successfully performed.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/7/1621composite repairaluminum oxide sandblastingworking distancemicrotensile bond strength |
| spellingShingle | Phoebe Burrer Amanda Costermani Matej Par Thomas Attin Tobias T. Tauböck Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength Materials composite repair aluminum oxide sandblasting working distance microtensile bond strength |
| title | Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength |
| title_full | Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength |
| title_fullStr | Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength |
| title_short | Effect of Varying Working Distances between Sandblasting Device and Composite Substrate Surface on the Repair Bond Strength |
| title_sort | effect of varying working distances between sandblasting device and composite substrate surface on the repair bond strength |
| topic | composite repair aluminum oxide sandblasting working distance microtensile bond strength |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/7/1621 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT phoebeburrer effectofvaryingworkingdistancesbetweensandblastingdeviceandcompositesubstratesurfaceontherepairbondstrength AT amandacostermani effectofvaryingworkingdistancesbetweensandblastingdeviceandcompositesubstratesurfaceontherepairbondstrength AT matejpar effectofvaryingworkingdistancesbetweensandblastingdeviceandcompositesubstratesurfaceontherepairbondstrength AT thomasattin effectofvaryingworkingdistancesbetweensandblastingdeviceandcompositesubstratesurfaceontherepairbondstrength AT tobiasttaubock effectofvaryingworkingdistancesbetweensandblastingdeviceandcompositesubstratesurfaceontherepairbondstrength |