Premium
Effect of Surface Preparation on the Failure Load of a Highly Filled Composite Resin Bonded to a Denture Base Resin
Author(s) -
Shimizu Hiroshi,
Kawaguchi Tomohiro,
Yoshida Kaneyoshi,
Tsue Fumitake,
Takahashi Yutaka
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of prosthodontics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.902
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1532-849X
pISSN - 1059-941X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1532-849x.2009.00496.x
Subject(s) - materials science , crosshead , composite material , composite number , base (topology) , acrylic resin , universal testing machine , resin composite , flexural strength , coating , ultimate tensile strength , mathematical analysis , mathematics
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the surface preparation on the maximum fracture load value of a highly filled gingival shade composite resin bonded to a denture base resin. Materials and Methods: Block specimens were prepared from a heat‐processed denture base resin and divided into five groups. The flat surfaces of the specimens were abraded with 400‐grit silicon carbide paper, then prepared in one of the following ways: (1) without preparation (group 1); (2) application of silane coupling agent (group 2); (3) application of dichloromethane (group 3); (4) application of dichloromethane following the silane coupling agent (group 4); or (5) tribochemical silica coating (group 5). A highly filled gingival shade composite resin was applied (area Ø= 5 mm) and polymerized with a light polymerizing unit. Specimens made entirely of heat‐processed denture base resin were also fabricated as references (group 6). The halves of the specimens of groups 4, 5, and 6 were thermocycled up to 10,000 times in water between 5°C and 55°C with a 1‐minute dwell time at each temperature. Shear testing was performed in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, and the maximum fracture load values were determined (n = 10). Results: The maximum fracture load values of the highly filled gingival shade composite resin bonded to the denture base resin for all preparation groups were significantly enhanced before thermocycling ( p < 0.05). Group 5 exhibited the greatest fracture load value, followed by group 4, compared to the other groups ( p < 0.05), however, the fracture load values significantly decreased for these groups after thermocycling ( p < 0.05), whereas the fracture load value of group 6 did not decrease ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: Tribochemical silica coating and the application of dichloromethane after the silane coupling agent were effective surface preparations for the bonding of a highly filled gingival shade composite resin to a denture base resin, however, the bond durability of these treatments may be insufficient.