Repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged resin nanoceramics

dc.authorid Cakmak, Gulce/0000-0003-1751-9207
dc.authorscopusid 43462218200
dc.authorscopusid 57193141901
dc.authorwosid SUBAŞI, MERYEM GÜLCE/B-6339-2019
dc.contributor.author Subasi, Meryem Gulce
dc.contributor.author Alp, Gulce
dc.date.accessioned 2024-05-25T11:20:31Z
dc.date.available 2024-05-25T11:20:31Z
dc.date.issued 2017
dc.department Okan University en_US
dc.department-temp [Subasi, Meryem Gulce] Istanbul Aydin Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Istanbul, Turkey; [Alp, Gulce] Okan Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Istanbul, Turkey en_US
dc.description Cakmak, Gulce/0000-0003-1751-9207 en_US
dc.description.abstract PURPOSE. To explore the influence of different surface conditionings on surface changes and the influence of surface treatments and aging on the bond strengths of composites to non-aged and aged resin nanoceramics. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Rectangular-shaped non-aged and aged (5000 thermocycles) resin nanoceramic specimens (Lava Ultimate) (n=63, each) were divided into 3 groups according to surface treatments (untreated, air abrasion, or silica coating) (n=21). The surface roughness was measured and scanning electron microscopy was used to examine one specimen from each group. Afterwards, the specimens were repaired with a composite resin (Filtek Z550) and half were sent for aging (5000 thermocycles, n=10, each). Shear bond strengths and failure types were evaluated. Roughness and bond strength were investigated by two-and three-way analysis of variance, respectively. The correlation between the roughness and bond strength was investigated by Pearson's correlation test. RESULTS. Surface-treated samples had higher roughness compared with the untreated specimens (P=.000). For the non-aged resin nanoceramic groups, aging was a significant factor for bond strength; for the aged resin nanoceramic groups, surface treatment and aging were significant factors. The failures were mostly adhesive after thermal cycling, except in the non-aged untreated group and the aged air-abraded group, which had mostly mixed failures. Roughness and bond strength were positively correlated (P=.003). CONCLUSION. Surface treatment is not required for the repair of non-aged resin nanoceramic; for the repair of aged resin nanoceramic restorations, air abrasion is recommended. en_US
dc.identifier.citationcount 16
dc.identifier.doi 10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.364
dc.identifier.endpage 370 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2005-7806
dc.identifier.issn 2005-7814
dc.identifier.issue 5 en_US
dc.identifier.pmid 29142644
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-85033372393
dc.identifier.scopusquality Q1
dc.identifier.startpage 364 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.364
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14517/508
dc.identifier.volume 9 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000415608500007
dc.identifier.wosquality Q3
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Korean Acad Prosthodontics en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 17
dc.subject Bond strength en_US
dc.subject Repair en_US
dc.subject Resin nanoceramic en_US
dc.subject Roughness en_US
dc.subject Surface treatment en_US
dc.title Repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged resin nanoceramics en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.wos.citedbyCount 17

Files