This study was performed to evaluate the interfacial shear bond strength of base (direct and indirect) and repair composites with aging and surface treatment methods.
Direct composite resin specimens (Charisma®, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany) were aged for 5 min, 1 hour, 24 hours, and 1 week in 37℃ distilled water before surface treatment, and then divided into five groups: Group 1, grinding; Group 2, grinding and application of bonding agent; Group 3, grinding, etching with 37% phosphoric acid for 30sec, and application of bonding agent; Group 4, grinding, etching with 37% phosphoric acid for 30sec, silane treatment, and application of bonding agent; Group 5, grinding, etching with 4% hydrofluoric acid for 30sec, silane treatment, and application of bonding agent.
Indirect composite resin specimens (Artglass®, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany) were aged for 1 week in 37℃ distilled water and divided into seven groups: Group 1 - Group 5, equal to Charisma specimens; Group 6, grinding, etching with 37% phosphoric acid for 60sec, silane treatment, and application of bonding agent; Group7, grinding, etching with 4% hydrofluoric acid for 60 sec, silane treatment, and application of bonding agent.
The repair material(Charisma®) was then added on the center of the surface (5 mm in diameter, 5 mm in height). The shear bond strength was tested and the data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the Student-Newman-Keuls test.
The following conclusions were drawn.
1. The shear bond strength of Charisma® specimens aged for 1 hour was significantly higher in Group 2 and Group 5 than in Group 1 (p<0.05), and that of Charisma® specimens aged for 1 week was significantly higher in Group 3 and Group 5 than in Group 1 (p<0.05). No significant difference was found in the bond strength of specimens aged for 5 min and 24 hours.
2. In Group 2 of the Charisma® specimens, there was significant difference between the bond strength of 24 hours and that of 1 week (p<0.05).
3. In Group 4 of the Charisma® specimens, the shear bond strength of specimens aged for 24 hours was significantly higher than the others(p<0.05).
4. There was no significant difference between the shear bond strength of the Artglass® specimens.
5. Most of the Charisma® specimens showed cohesive fractures. Artglass® specimens that were etched with acid (phosphoric or hydrofluoric) for 30 sec showed more cohesive fractures.
Purpose of this research is estimating polymerization depth of different source of light. XL 3000 for halogen light, Apollo 95E for plasma arc light and Easy cure for LED light source were used in this study. Different shade (B1 & A3) resin composites (Esthet-X, Dentsply, U.S.A.) were used to measure depth of cure. 1, 2, and 3 mm thick samples were light cured for three seconds, six seconds or 10 seconds with Apollo 95E and they were light cured with XL-3000 and Easy cure for 10 seconds, 20 seconds, or 40 seconds. Vicker's hardness test carried out after store samples for 24 hours in distilled water.
Results were as following.
Curing time increases from all source of lights, curing depth increased(p<0.05). Depth (that except 1mm group and 2mm group which lighten to halogen source of light) deepens in all groups, Vickers hardness decreased(p<0.05). Vicker's hardness of A3 shade composite was lower in all depths more than B1 shade composites in group that do polymerization for 10 seconds and 20 seconds using halogen source of light(p<0.05), but group that do polymerization for 40 seconds did not show difference(p>0.05). Groups that do polymerization using Plasma arc and LED source of light did not show Vicker's hardness difference according to color at surface and 1mm depth(p>0.05), but showed difference according to color at 2mm and 3mm depth(p<0.05). The results showed that Apollo 95E need more polymerization times than manufacturer's recommendation (3 seconds), and Easy cure need polymerization time of XL-3000 at least.