Abstract
The study evaluated the effect of the application of simplified or full-step surface treatments and aging times on dentin bonding stability and nanoleakage of indirect resin composite restorations. This is an in vitro study with one hundred and sixty indirect resin composite restorations (4.8 x 2.8 x 4.0 mm) produced to fill dentin preparations in bovine dentin. The specimens were divided into eight groups according to chemical treatment [No treatment; Silane; Scotchbond™ Universal adhesive (SBU); and Silane + SBU], and aging time in water [24 h and six months]. Push-out bond strength (PBS) was evaluated by a universal testing machine (1.0 mm/min), failure modes by a dissecting microscope, and nanoleakage by scanning electron microscopy. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey posthoc tests (p<0.05) were used to compare PBS among the groups, while failure modes and nanoleakage were analyzed descriptively. The bonding stability of indirect resin composite restorations was influenced by chemical surface treatments and aging times (p <0.05). Significant differences were determined between chemical treatment applied, mainly when SBU was used after aging the samples. The different surface treatments and aging time did not influence the nanoleakage at the cement-resin interface. The study results suggest that the simplified surface treatment using a universal adhesive improved the dentin bonding stability of indirect resin composite restorations.
Highlights
Indirect resin composite restorations (IRCR) can be a viable alternative when there is a considerable loss of tooth structure in posterior teeth that require onlays, inlays or overlays restorations, non-carious cervical lesions, and class II preparations (Caneppele, et al, 2020; Torres, et al, 2020)
The study results suggest that the simplified surface treatment using a universal adhesive improved the dentin bonding stability of indirect resin composite restorations
In non-aged specimens (24 h), C, S, and ScotchbondTM Universal adhesive (SBU) groups showed statistically similar bond strength values, which were higher than S + SBU group
Summary
Indirect resin composite restorations (IRCR) can be a viable alternative when there is a considerable loss of tooth structure in posterior teeth that require onlays, inlays or overlays restorations, non-carious cervical lesions, and class II preparations (Caneppele, et al, 2020; Torres, et al, 2020). To improve the interaction on the interface between indirect resin composite substrate and resin-based luting agent, sandblasting with alumina oxide, application of silane, and universal adhesive systems on the indirect substrate have been suggested, which increases dentin bond strength (Campos, et al, 2020). Considering IRCR, the substrate sandblasting would require an additional laboratory step, impairing the professional to perform a fast in-office procedure (Silva Júnior, et al, 2017) In this way, only chemical treatments of the indirect substrate with silane associated or not to an adhesive system have been performed before bonding IRCR (Isolan, et al, 2014)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
