Bir Nanohibrit Kompozitin Tamirinde Kullanılan Farklı Yüzey İşlemleri Ve Kompozit Rezinlerin Mikrosızıntıya Etkisi

Diğdem Eren; Canan Aydoğan

doi:10.7126/cumudj.449364

TR EN

Bir Nanohibrit Kompozitin Tamirinde Kullanılan Farklı Yüzey İşlemleri Ve Kompozit Rezinlerin Mikrosızıntıya Etkisi

Öz

Effect of Different Surface Treatments and Composite Resins Used for Repairing Nanohybrid Resins on Microleakege

Abstract

Amaç: Nanohibrit bir kompozit rezinin tamirinde sekiz farklı yüzey işlemi ve üç farklı kompozit rezinin etkisini mikrosızıntı açısından değerlendirmektir.

Materyal ve Metot: Nanohibrit kompozit rezin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, ABD) ile hazırlanan bloklar yüzey işlemlerine göre Grup 1 (kontrol), Grup 2(frez), Grup 3 (frezz+silan), Grup 4 (Al₂O₃), Grup 5 (Al₂O₃+silan), Grup 6 (tribokimyasal silika kaplama), Grup 7 (lazer), Grup 8 ( lazer+silan) olmak üzere ayrıldı. Örneklere yaşlandırma ve yüzey işlemleri yapıldıktan sonra her grup tamir kompozitleri (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp, Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japonya) ve Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, İtalya)) uygulanmak üzere 3’er alt gruba ayrıldı. Tamir işleminden sonra örnekler 1000 devir termal siklus cihazında bekletildi. Daha sonra mikrosızıntı testi yapılıp istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi.

Bulgular: Mikrosızıntı testinde tüm grupların ortalamaları skor 0 ‘’sızıntı yok’’ olarak bulunmuştur.

Sonuç: Yüzey işlemleri ve kompozitler arasında istatistiksel olarak fark yoktur.

Anahtar kelimeler: Kompozit tamiri, Cojet, Er:YAG lazer, mikrosızıntı, kendinden adezivli akışkan kompozit

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effect of eight different surface treatments and three different composite resins in the repair of a nanohybrid composite resin in terms of microleakage.

Materials and Methods: Blocks prepared with nanohybrid composite resin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) were classified into Group 1 (control), Group 2 (frez), Group 3 (frez + silane), Group 4 ), Group 5 (Al₂O₃ + silane), Group 6 (tribochemical silica coating), Group 7 (laser), Group 8 (laser + silane). After the aging and surface treatments of the samples were performed, each group was divided into three sub-grups for application of repair composites (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp., Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japan) and Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, Italy) the lower subgroup was separated. After the repair, the samples were stored in a thermal cycle of 1000 cycles. Then, a microleakage test was made and evaluated statistically.

Results: In microleakage test, the average of all groups was found as 0 '' no leakage ''.

Conclusion: No statistical difference was found in this regard between surface treatments and composite groups.

Key Words: Composite repair, Cojet, Er:YAG laser, microleakage, self-adhesive flowable composit

Keywords

Kompozit tamiri,Cojet,Er:YAG lazer,mikrosızıntı

References

1. Rasines Alcaraz MG, Veitz-Keenan A, Sahrmann P, Schmidlin PR, Davis D, and Iheozor-Ejiofor Z. Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth. The Cochrane Database of Syst Rev 2014; 31: Cd005620.
2. Tezvergil A, Lassila LV, and Vallittu PK. Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers. J Dent 2003; 31: 521-525.
3. Denehy, Bouschlicher, and Vargas, Intraoral repair of cosmetic restorations. Dent Clin of North Am. 1998; 42(4): 719-737
4. Tyas MJ, Anusavice KJ, Frencken JE, and Mount, GJ. Minimal intervention dentistry--a review. FDI Commission Project 1-97. Int Dent J 2000; 50(1): 1-12.
5. Gordan VV, Mjor IA, Blum IR, and Wilson N. Teaching students the repair of resin-based composite restorations: a survey of North American dental schools. Journal of the American Dental Association 2003; 134(3): 317-323; quiz 338-319.
6. Gordan VV, Mondragon E, and Shen C. Replacement of resin-based composite: evaluation of cavity design, cavity depth, and shade matching. Quintessence İnt 2000; 33(4): 273-278.
7. Cavalcanti AN, De Lima AF, Peris AR, Mitsui FH, and Marchi GM, Effect of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007; 19(2): 90-98; discussion 99.
8. Jafarzadeh Kashi TS, Erfan M, Rakhshan V, Aghabaigi N, and Tabatabaei FS. An in vitro assessment of the effects of three surface treatments on repair bond strength of aged composites. Oper Dent 2011; 36(6): 608-617.

9. Bouschlicher MR, Reinhardt JW, and Vargas MA Surface treatment techniques for resin composite repair. Am J Dent 1997; 10(6): 279-283.
10. Brosh T, Pilo R , Bichacho N, and Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 77(2): 122-126.
11. Duran İ, Ural Ç, Yilmaz B, and Tatar N. Effects of Er:YAG Laser Pretreatment with Different Energy Levels on Bond Strength of Repairing Composite Materials. Photomed Laser Surg. 2015; 33(6): 320-325.
12. Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, and Della Bona A. Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 2009 25(4): 442-451.
13. Nassoohi N, Kazemi H, Sadaghiani M, Mansouri M, and Rakhshan V. Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites. Dent Res J 2015; 12(6): 554-561.
14. Gupta S, Parolia A, Jain A, Kundabala M, Mohan M, and De Moraes Porto ICC. A comparative effect of various surface chemical treatments on the resin composite-composite repair bond strength. J Indian Soc Pedod and Prev Dent 2015; 33(3): 245-249.
15. Valente LL, Silva MP, Fonseca AS, Munchow EA, Isolan CP, and Moraes RR. Effect of Diamond Bur Grit Size on Composite Repair. The journal of adhesive dentistry 2015; 17(3): 257-263.
16. Kimyai S1, Mohammadi N, Navimipour EJ, Rikhtegaran S. Comparison of the effect of three mechanical surface treatments on the repair bond strength of a laboratory composite. Photomed Laser Surg. 2010 Oct;28 Suppl 2:S25-30. doi: 10.1089/pho.2009.2598.
17. Liebenberg WH. A useful evacuation aid for intraoral air-abrasive devices. Quintessence Int 1997; 28(2): 105-108.
18. Yeşilyurt A. Kompozit rezinlerin mine ve dentine makaslama dayanımları üzerine air-abrazyonun etkisi. A.Ü. Diş Hek. Fak. Derg 2005; 32(3): 191-200.
19. Ader C and Krejci I. Indications and limitations of Er:YAG laser applications in dentistry. Am J Dent 2006; 19(3): 178-186.
20. Eren D, Bektaş Ö, Siso Ş. Can Er:YAG laser be an alternative to conventional methods for repairing composite resins? Cumhuriyet Dent J 2013;16(2): 125-132.
21. Coluzzi DJ. An overview of laser wavelengths used in dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2000; 44(4): 753-765.
22. Göknar, Er:YAG laser tekniği ile diş sert dokusunda kavite oluşturulmasına ilişkin çalışma şartlarının incelenmesi ve optimal parametrelerin tayini, in Nükleer Mühendislik. 2006, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi: İstanbul. p. 1-105.
23. Papacchini F, Dall’oca S, Chieffi N, Goracci C, Sadek FT, Suh BI, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Composite to composite bond strength in the repair of micro-filled hybrid resin:Effect of surface treatment and oxygen inhibition. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 2007:9(1):25-31
24. Goracci C, Raffaelli O, Monticelli F, Balleri B, Bertelli E, and Ferrari M. The adhesion between prefabricated FRC posts and composite resin cores: microtensile bond strength with and without post-silanization. Dental materials 2005; 21(5): 437-444.
25. Blatz MB, Sadan A, and Kern M. Resin-ceramic bonding: a review of the literature. J Prosthetic Dent 2003; 89(3): 268-274.
26. Http://Multimedia.3m.Com/Mws/Media/219219o/Cojet-Product-Dossier-in-English.Pdf. [cited 2016.
27. Altun C. Restoratif diş hekimliğinde mikrosızıntı. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi 2004; 46: 264-269.
28. Hadavi F, Hey JH, Ambrose ER, and Elbadrawy HE. Effect of different adhesive systems on microleakage at the amalgam/composite resin interface. Oper Dent 1993; 18(1): 2-7.
29. Wang R, Shi Y, Li T, Pan Y, Cui Y, Xia W. Adhesive interfacial characteristics and the related bonding performance of four selfetching adhesives with diferent functional monomers applied to dentin. J Dent. 2017;62:72–80
30. Wei Y, Silikas N, Zhang Z, Watts D. Hygroscopic dimensional changes of self-adhering and new resin-matrix composites during water sorption/desorption cycles. Dent Mater. 2011;27:259–66.
31. Brueckner C, Schneider H, Haak R. Shear bond strength and tooth-composite interaction with self-adhering fowable composites. Oper Dent 2017;42:90–100.
32. Hossain M, Yamada Y, Nakamura Y, Murakami Y, Tamaki Y, and Matsumoto K. A study on surface roughness and microleakage test in cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation and etched bur cavities. Lasers Med Sci 2003; 18(1): 25-31.
33. Lizarelli FZ. Ablation rate and morphological aspects of composite resins exposed to Er:YAG laser. J Oral Laser Appl 2005; 5(3): 151-160.
34. Rossato DM, Bandeca MC, Saade EG, Lizarelli RFZ, Bagnato VS, Saad JRC. Influence of Er:YAG laser on surface treatment of aged composite resin to repair restoration. Laser Physics 2009;19:2144-2149.
35. Batista G, Kamozaki M, Gutierrez N, Caneppele T, Torres C. Effect of different surface treatments on composite repairs. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17(5): 421-426.
36. Hasani Tabatabaei M, Alizade Y, Taalim S. Effect of various surface treatment on repair strength of composite resin. J Dent 2004; 1:5-11
37. Yaman BC, Guray BE, Dorter C, Gomec Y, Yazicioglu O, and Erdilek D. Effect of the erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser or diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of class V cavities restored with different adhesives and composite systems. Lasers med sci 2012; 27(4): 785-794.
38. Peterson J, Rizk M, Hoch M, Wiegand A. Bonding Performance of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel, dentin and a nano-hybrid composite. Odontology 2018; 106(2): 171-180
39. Hamdy TM. Interfacial microscopic examination and chemical analysis of resin-dentin interface of self-adhering flowable resin composite. Version 3. F1000Res 2017 ;6 :1688
40. Tuloglu N, Sen Tunc E, Ozer S, Bayrak S. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite on dentin with and without application of an adhesive system. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014; 5(12): 97-101.
41. D'Arcangelo C, Vanini L. Effect of three surface treatments on the adhesive properties of indirect composite restorations. J Adhes Dent 2007; 9: 319-26.
42. Hemadri M, Saritha G, Rajasekhar V, Pachlag KA, Purushotham R, and Reddy UK. Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Composites Using Surface Treatments and Repair Materials: An In vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2014; 6(6): 22-25.
43. Bonstein T, Garlapo D, Donarummo J Jr., Bush PJ. Evaluation of varied repair protocols applied to aged composite resin. J Adhes Dent 2005; 7: 41-9.
44. Ozcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GA, and Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 2007; 23(10): 1276-1282.
45. Frankenberger R, Lopes M, Perdigao J, Ambrose WW, and Rosa BT. The use of flowable composites as filled adhesives. Dental materials 2002; 18(3): 227-238.
46. Lazaridou D, Belli R , PetschelAt, and Lohbauer U. Are resin composites suitable replacements for amalgam? A study of two-body wear. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19(6): 1485-1492.
47. Papacchini F, Radovic I, Magni E, Goracci C, Monticelli F, Chieffi N, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Flowable composites as intermediate agents without adhesive application in resin composite repair. Am J Dent 2008; 21: 53–58.
48. Wendler M, Belli R, Panzer R, Skibbe D, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Repair Bond Strength of Aged Resin Composite after Different Surface and Bonding Treatments. Materials (Basel) 2016; 7:9(7).
49. Mobarak E and El-Deeb H. Two-year interfacial bond durability and nanoleakage of repaired silorane-based resin composite. Oper Dent 2013; 38(4): 408-418.
50. Mitsaki-Matsou H, Karanika-Kouma A, Papadoyiannis Y, and Theodoridou-Pahine S. An in vitro study of the tensile strength of composite resins repaired with the same or another composite resin. Quintessence international 1991; 22(6): 475-481.
51. Hannig C, Laubach S, Hahn P, Attin T. Shear bond strength of repaired adhesive filling materials using different repair procedures. J Adhes Dent 2006: 8; 35–40
52. Ozcan M, Barbosa SH, Melo RM, Galhano GA, Bottino MA. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 1276–1282.
53. Rinastiti M, Ozcan M, Siswomihardjo W, Busscher HJ. Immediate repair bond strengths of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites after different surface treatments. J Dent 2010; 38: 29–3.
54. El-Askary FS, El-Banna AH, van Noort R. Immediate vs delayed repair bond strength of a nanohybrid resin composite. J Adhes Dent 2012; 14(3): 265-74
55. Derand P and Derand T. Bond strength of luting cements to zirconium oxide ceramics. Int J Prosthodont 2000; 13(2): 131-135.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Health Care Administration

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Diğdem Eren ^*
0000-0001-8004-7762
Türkiye

Canan Aydoğan
0000-0003-0137-0524
Türkiye

Publication Date

October 17, 2018

Submission Date

July 31, 2018

Acceptance Date

September 14, 2018

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 21 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.449364

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA75FZ73ML

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Eren D, Aydoğan C (October 1, 2018) Bir Nanohibrit Kompozitin Tamirinde Kullanılan Farklı Yüzey İşlemleri Ve Kompozit Rezinlerin Mikrosızıntıya Etkisi. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 21 3 184–194.