The physical characteristics of resin composite–calcium silicate interface as part of a layered/laminate adhesive restoration

Abstract

ObjectivesTo compare in-vitro micro-shear bond strengths (μSBS) of resin composite to calcium silicate cement (Biodentine™) vs. glass ionomer cement vs. resin modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) using an adhesive in self-etch (SE)/total etch (TE) mode after aging three substrates and bond and characterizing their failure modes. MethodsResin composite was SE/TE bonded to 920 standardized disks of Biodentine™, GIC & RM-GIC. Dividing samples into two groups, the first underwent early (t=0min, 5min, 20min, 24h) or delayed (t=2wk, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months) substrate aging before bonding and μSBS (t=24h) testing. In the second, adhesive was applied after either early (t=5min) or delayed (t=2wk) substrate aging and then tested after bond aging (t=2wk, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months). The failure modes were identified using stereomicroscope. SEM images of selected samples were analyzed. ResultsNo significant differences were observed between (SE)/(TE) bonding modes (P=0.42). With substrate aging, a significant reduction in μSBS occurred between early and delayed time intervals for Biodentine™ (P=0.001), but none for the GIC/RM-GIC (P=0.465, P=0.512 respectively). With bond aging, there was no significant difference between time intervals for all groups, except at 6 months for the GIC (P<0.05). Modes of failure were primarily cohesive within all the substrates (68.82%) followed by adhesive failure at the resin–substrate interface (21.71%). SignificanceBiodentine™ is a weak restorative material in its early setting phase. Placing the overlying resin composite as part of the laminate/layered definitive restoration is best delayed for >2wk to allow sufficient intrinsic maturation to withstand contraction forces from the resin composite. A total-etch or self-etch adhesive may be used.