Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of different chemical surface treatments and aging on dentin bond strength and nanoleakage of semi-direct restorations cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. One hundred and sixty semi-direct composite restorations (4.8 x 2.8 x 4.0 mm) were produced to fill dentin preparations in bovine tooth, and the specimens were divided into 8 groups according to chemical treatment [No treatment, Silane (S), Scotchbond™ Universal adhesive (SBU), and S+SBU], and aging time in water [24 h and 6 months]. Push-out bond strength (PBS) was measured through 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's post-hoc (p<0.05) test were used to analyze PBS data, whilst failure modes and nanoleakage were analyzed descriptively. The bond durability was influenced by different chemical surface treatments after 6 months of aging in distilled water, with the best performance for the group that uses silane associated with the universal adhesive. Nanoleakage was greater at the dentin-cement interface, from the base of the restorations. However, the infiltration of silver crystals at the cement-resin interface was not influenced by the different chemical treatments applied. The results of the study suggest that self-adhesive cement promotes efficient adhesion to the interface that improves over time without the need for chemical surface treatment or when using SBU, with or without silane.
Highlights
To minimize technical difficulties in the use of resin composite by the direct technique, an indirect technique allows for better occlusal anatomy, proximal contact, and better marginal adaptation due to the lower stresses caused by the polymerization contraction
The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of different chemical surface treatments and aging on dentin bond strength and nanoleakage of semi-direct restorations cemented with self
In specimens aged for 6 months, the use of ScotchbondTM Universal adhesive (SBU) alone or associated with silane provided higher values than the silane alone, it was not different from the group without chemical treatment
Summary
To minimize technical difficulties in the use of resin composite by the direct technique, an indirect technique allows for better occlusal anatomy, proximal contact, and better marginal adaptation due to the lower stresses caused by the polymerization contraction. When opting for an indirect restoration, it is necessary to use a temporary restoration and the contribution of a laboratory technician that leads to increased costs and treatment time (Rho, et al, 2013; Alharbi, et al, 2014) In this way, the semi-direct technique can be an excellent treatment option for large posterior restorations since it adds the advantages of direct and indirect techniques such as decreased polymerization stresses in the adhesive interface, aesthetic refinement, and adjustments outside the oral cavity, precision of restoration margins, low operational cost and time of execution (Bandéca, et al, 2012; Fahl Jr, 2015). In clinical practice, the use of silane as a bonding agent for indirect restorations can cause problems in adaptation, because as the oral environment is humid, it causes its degradation over time (Martinlinna, et al, 2018)
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.
