Evaluation of new methods for composite repair.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of air abrasion (sandblasting), hydrofluoric acid (HF) etching, and acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) for composite repair. Five different composites (three hybrids, one small-particle, and one microfill) were used to test the effects of different compositions and particle sizes. A phosphonate resin bonding agent was used for all repair procedures. In general, air abrasion provided the strongest repairs, approximately 60% of cohesive strength. The effect of HF varied with different composites, either improving or reducing the repair strength. APF gave the lowest interfacial bond strengths for all composites except the microfill.
Swift
E J
EJ
Department of Operative Dentistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
LeValley
B D
BD
Boyer
D B
DB
D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D000149:Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride; D000399:Air Pressure; D000537:Aluminum Oxide; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D003188:Composite Resins; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003775:Dental Polishing; D017269:Dental Prosthesis Repair; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D006858:Hydrofluoric Acid; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D010316:Particle Size; D019279:Resin Cements; D013499:Surface Properties; D013718:Tensile Strength
D003188:Composite Resins; C079764:Pertac hybrid; D019279:Resin Cements; C065770:Herculite XR; C065771:P50 composite resin; C074741:Silux Plus; C036885:prisma-fil; D000149:Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D000537:Aluminum Oxide; D006858:Hydrofluoric Acid