Influence of Different Adhesives and Surface Treatments on Shear and Tensile Bond Strength and Microleakage with Micro-CT of Repaired Bulk-Fill Composites

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorYildirim-Isik, Handan
dc.contributor.authorBuyukgoze-Dindar, Mediha
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-31T15:09:05Z
dc.date.available2026-01-31T15:09:05Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentİstanbul Beykent Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractThe repair of defective composite restorations, particularly bulk-fill composites, offers a conservative alternative to complete replacement. However, establishing durable adhesion between aged and fresh composites remains a clinical challenge due to the altered surface properties of aged materials. This in vitro study investigated the effects of different surface treatment protocols (no treatment, diamond bur roughening, and air abrasion) and adhesive systems (G-Premio Bond, Clearfil SE Bond, and Adper Single Bond 2) on the shear bond strength (mu SBS), tensile bond strength (mu TBS), and microleakage of repaired bulk-fill composites. Results demonstrated that both surface treatment and adhesive type significantly affected bond strength (p < 0.05). Mechanical surface treatments, particularly diamond bur roughening and air abrasion, enhanced SBS and mu TBS compared to untreated controls. The highest mu SBS and mu TBS values were observed with diamond bur treatment combined with Adper Single Bond 2, reaching mean values of 25.8 +/- 2.1 MPa and 28.3 +/- 1.8 MPa, respectively. Air abrasion with Clearfil SE Bond also significantly increased bond strengths (mu SBS: 22.1 +/- 2.0 MPa; mu TBS: 23.5 +/- 1.7 MPa) relative to no treatment (p < 0.05). Micro-computed tomography analysis revealed that Clearfil SE Bond following diamond bur roughening resulted in the lowest microleakage scores, with a mean leakage volume of 0.12 +/- 0.04 m. These findings underscore the importance of mechanical surface conditioning and appropriate adhesive selection to enhance both bond strength and sealing efficacy in composite repair procedures.
dc.description.sponsorshipIstanbul Beykent University [2023-24-BAP-06, 2024]; Istanbul Beykent University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was funded by the Istanbul Beykent University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit, grant number 2023-24-BAP-06, 2024.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/polym17121680
dc.identifier.issn2073-4360
dc.identifier.issue12
dc.identifier.pmid40574209
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105009015720
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org./10.3390/polym17121680
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12662/10821
dc.identifier.volume17
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001515578200001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMdpi
dc.relation.ispartofPolymers
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20260128
dc.subjectcomposite repair
dc.subjectdental bonding
dc.subjectdental leakage
dc.subjectshear strength
dc.subjecttensile strength
dc.titleInfluence of Different Adhesives and Surface Treatments on Shear and Tensile Bond Strength and Microleakage with Micro-CT of Repaired Bulk-Fill Composites
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu