PMID- 36661887 OWN - Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH CI - Copyright Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH OCI - Copyright Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH TA - Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent JT - International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry IS - 1945-3388 (Electronic) IS - 0198-7569 (Print) IP - 1 VI - 43 PST - epublish DP - 2023 PG - 53-60 LA - en TI - Repair Bond Strength of Aged Composite Resins Using Different Surface Treatment Protocols LID - 10.11607/prd.5026 [doi] FAU - Elsaca, Nicole AU - Elsaca N FAU - Pardo-Díaz, Carolina AU - Pardo-Díaz C FAU - Atria, Pablo J AU - Atria P FAU - Jorquera, Gilbert AU - Jorquera G FAU - Turbino, Miriam Lacalle AU - Turbino M FAU - Sampaio, Camila Sobral AU - Sampaio C CN - AB - This study evaluated shear bond strength (SBS) of thermally aged composite resins repaired using different surface protocols. Four-hundred composite resin samples were made using the following materials (100 samples per material): Filtek Z350XT (FXT); Spectra Smart (SSM); IPS Empress Direct (EDI); and Forma (FOR). Each group's samples were then divided into 10 groups (n = 10 samples per group): G1: no surface treatment; G2: phosphoric acid-etching + universal-adhesive (PU); G3: surface roughening + PU (RPU); G4: RPU + silane (RPSU); G5: surface roughening + hydrofluoric acid-etching + universal adhesive (RHU); G6: RHU + silane (RHSU); G7: dry sandblast + PU (DsPU); G8: DsPU + silane (DsPSU); G9: wet sandblast + PU (WsPU); and G10: WsPU + silane (WsPSU). G1 was freshly repaired, and G2 to G10 were thermally aged before repair. Specimens were tested for SBS, and the failure type was observed with a magnifying loupe. Representative images were obtained using a scanning electronic microscope. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests (P = .05). Differences were detected among different surface treatments and among different composite resins with equal surface treatments (P < .05). SBS means ranged from 10.48 (FOR:G2) to 20.70 (FXT:G7). The highest SBS values were seen in G7 to G10 (P > .05), while lowest values were generally observed for G2. G1 showed higher results compared to G2 (P < .05), except for EDI (P > .05). Most failures corresponded with cohesive type. In general, thermally aged composite resin presented a decreased repair bond strength potential when no additional surface treatment was applied. Sandblasting improved the SBS of repaired aged composite resins. AID - 3834017