Szerző szerinti böngészés "Rana, Bostanpour"

Megjelenítve 1 - 1 (Összesen 1)
  • Nincs kép
    TételKorlátozottan hozzáférhető
    Effectivness of universal adhesives with rapid bond technology on aged nano hybrid composite surface
    Rana, Bostanpour; Martos, Renáta; Fogorvostudományi Kar; DE--Fogorvostudományi Kar
    Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the repair bond strength (μTBS) of two universal adhesives, Clearfil Universal Bond Quick (CU) and G-Premio Bond (GPB) when utilizing rapid bond technology on aged nanohybrid composite surfaces. Materials and Methods: Tetric EvoCeram (TEC) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) nanohybrid composite blocks (7x10x10 mm) were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions in an individually fabricated Teflon mold. The top surface of each TEC block was polished up to #1200 grit with SiC abrasive papers, subsequently, all composite blocks were stored at room temperature for 24 hours, which was followed by aging of 5000 cycles (dwell time of 30sec at 5-50°C) in a thermocycler machine. Prior to the adhesive application, the surface was air abraded with 50 μm Al₂O₃ particles then the repair was completed by incremental layering of TEC resin composite according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Finally, the composite blocks were sliced with the Hard Tissue Microtome (Leica SP 1600, Wetzlar, Germany) into 1mm×1mm×14mm specimens, and the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) was measured by Instron 5544 (Massachusetts, USA) universal testing device. The failure mode was analyzed by an optical microscope (Olympus SZ61, Tokyo, Japan). Contact angle was also measured on the sandblasted surface using DSA 30 (Krüss, Hamburg, Germany) and Ellipse contact angle fitting was used for evaluation. The data was statistically analyzed by Microsoft Excel (Version 16.80). The significance level was set at 5% (α = 0.05). Results: The Microtensile Bond Strength (μTBS) test results did not show significant difference between the two adhesives (CU = 39.41±2.92 MPa, GPB = 40.51±2.37 MPa, p = 0.267). however, the contact angle measurements showed significant difference between the tested adhesives (CU = 25.46±0.468, GPB = 22.60±0.369, p < 0.05). The failure mode analysis showed 100% cohesive failure mode in all tested specimens. Conclusion: Although the two universal adhesives, CU and GPB, showed different contact angles on the tested composite surface, the Microtensile Bond Strength of CU and GPB on aged sandblasted nanohybrid composite surfaces did not differ significantly.