The micro-shear bond strength of two different repair systems to indirect restorative materials

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25241/stomaeduj.2020.7(4).art.1


Introduction The aim of this study was to evaluate the micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) of different repair systems (Clearfil Repair, iGOS Repair) to restorative materials for CAD/CAM (Cerasmart, Lava Ultimate, InCoris TZI , VITA Suprinity, VITA Mark II, IPS e.max CAD, IPS Empress CAD).
Methodology The 140 1.2 mm-thick specimens were prepared from CAD/CAM blocks (n=20) and thermocycled (10,000 cycles, 5–55°C, dwell time 20s). The specimens were randomly divided into two groups according to the repair system: Clearfil Repair (40% phosphoric acid+mixture of Clearfil Porcelain Bond Activator and Clearfil SE Bond Primer+Clearfil SE Bond+CLEARFIL MAJESTY ES-2) and iGOS Repair (40% phosphoric acid+ Multi Primer LIQUID+ iGOS Bond+ iGOS Universal). The composite resins were polymerized. All specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. The μSBS test was performed with a micro-shear testing machine (at 1 mm/min). The data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA, Tukey’s multiple comparison tests at a significance level of p<0.05. Each failure modes were examined under a stereomicroscope at×16 magnification.
Results The type of CAD/CAM restorative material and repair system showed a significant effect on the μSBS (p<0.05). Specimens repaired with the iGOS Repair system showed the highest μSBS values than the Clearfil Repair system among all tested materials except for the InCoris TZI group (p<0.05).
Conclusion All groups, except for the InCoris TZI group, repaired with iGOS Repair system showed higher μSBS than Clearfil Repair. The type of restoration and repair material is important in the success of the fracture repair.

Micro-Shear Bond Strength; Repair System; CAD-CAM Materials; Adhesion; Dental Prosthesis Repair.