Effect of biofilm on the repair bond strengths of composites

Journal of Dental Research

Volumn 89, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1476-1481

  Rinastiti, M ^a,b   Ozcan M ^c   Siswomihardjo, W ^b   Busscher, H J ^a   Van Der Mei, H C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY   (Indonesia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

biofilm; composite repair; intermediate adhesive resin; microhybrid composite; nanofilled composite; nanohybrid composite; silica coating

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIAL; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; FILTEK SUPREME; GRANDIO; RESIN; SILANE DERIVATIVE; SILICON DIOXIDE; TETRIC EVOCERAM;

ACTINOMYCES; ADHESION; ARTICLE; BIOFILM; CANDIDA ALBICANS; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL SURGERY; FUSOBACTERIUM NUCLEATUM; GRAM NEGATIVE BACTERIUM; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICAL STRESS; PHYSIOLOGY; POLYMERIZATION; STREPTOCOCCUS ORALIS; STREPTOCOCCUS SOBRINUS; SURFACE PROPERTY; TIME; VEILLONELLA;

ACTINOMYCES; ADHESIVENESS; BIOFILMS; CANDIDA ALBICANS; COATED MATERIALS, BIOCOMPATIBLE; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL RESTORATION REPAIR; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; FUSOBACTERIUM NUCLEATUM; GRAM-NEGATIVE BACTERIA; HUMANS; MATERIALS TESTING; POLYMERIZATION; SILANES; SILICON DIOXIDE; STREPTOCOCCUS ORALIS; STREPTOCOCCUS SOBRINUS; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TIME FACTORS; VEILLONELLA;

EID: 78650150884     PISSN: 00220345     EISSN: 15440591     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022034510381395     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Akova T., Ozkomur A., Uysal H. (2006). Effect of food-simulating liquids on the mechanical properties of provisional restorative materials. J Dent 22: 1130-1134.
2. Asmussen E. (1984). Softening of BISGMA-based polymers by ethanol and by organic acids of plaque. Scand J Dent Res 92: 257-261.
3. Beyth N., Bahir R., Matalon S., Domb A., Weiss E. (2008). Streptococcus mutans biofilm changes surface-topography of resin composites. Dent Mater 24: 732-736.
4. Bouschlicher MR, Reinhardt JW, Vargas MA (1997). Surface treatment techniques for resin composite repair. Am J Dent 10: 279-283.
5. Brendeke J., Özcan M. (2007). Effect of physicochemical aging conditions on the composite-composite repair bond strength. J Adhes Dent 9: 399-406.
6. Busscher HJ, Rinastiti M., Siswomihardjo W., Van der Mei HC (2010). Biofilm formation on dental restorative and implant materials. J Dent Res 89: 657-665.
7. Carlen A., Nikdel K., Wennerberg A., Holmberg K., Olsson J. (2001). Surface characteristics and in vitro biofilm formation on glass ionomer and composite resin. Biomaterials 22: 481-487.
8. Chiba K., Hosoda H., Fusayama T. (1989). The addition of an adhesive composite resin to the same material: bond strength and clinical techniques. J Prosthet Dent 61: 669-675.
9. Fúcio SB, Carvalho FG, Sobrinho LC, Sinhoreti MA, Puppin-Rontani RM (2008). The influence of 30-day-old Streptococcus mutans biofilm on the surface of esthetic restorative materials - An in vitro study. J Dent 36: 833-839.
10. Gmür R., Guggenheim B. (1983). Antigenic heterogeneity of Bacteroides intermedius as recognized by monoclonal antibodies. Infect Immun 42: 459-470.
11. Göpferich A. (1996). Mechanisms of polymer degradation and erosion. Biomaterials 17: 103-114.
12. Guggenheim B., Guggenheim M., Gmür R., Giertsen E., Thurnheer T. (2004). Application of the Zürich biofilm model to problems of cariology. Caries Res 38: 212-222.
13. Ikeda M., Matin K., Nikaido T., Foxton R., Tagami J. (2007). Effect of surface characteristics on adherence of S. mutans biofilms to indirect resin composites. Dent Mater J 26: 915-923.
14. Lee SY, Huang HM, Lin CY, Shih YH (1998). Leached components from dental composites in oral simulating fluids and the resultant composite strengths. J Oral Rehabil 25: 575-588.
15. Lucena-Martín C., González-López S., Navajas-Rodríguez de Mondelo JM (2001). The effect of various surface treatments and bonding agents on the repaired strength of heat-treated composites. J Prosthet Dent 86: 481-488.
16. McCabe JF, Carrick TE (1986). A statistical approach to the mechanical testing of dental materials. Dent Mater 2: 139-142.
17. ilo G. (1992). Biodegradation of dental composites/glass-ionomer cements. Adv Dent Res 6: 50-54.
18. Özcan M., Barbosa S., Melo R., Galhano G., Bottino M. (2007). Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 23: 1276-1282.
19. Rinastiti M., Özcan M., Siswomihardjo W., Busscher HJ (2010 a). Immediate repair bond strengths of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites after different surface treatments. J Dent 38: 29-38.
20. Rinastiti M., Özcan M., Siswomihardjo W., Busscher HJ (2010 b). Effects of surface conditioning on repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled composites. Clin Oral Investig [Epub ahead of print, May 25, 2010 ] (in press). doi:10.1007/s00784-010-0426-6
21. Robin C., Scherrer SS, Wiskott HW, de Rijk WG, Belser UC (2002). Weibull parameters of composite resin bond strengths to porcelain and noble alloy using the Rocatec system. Dent Mater 18: 389-395.
22. Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, Della Bona A. (2009). Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 25: 442-451.
23. Shahdad SA, Kennedy JG (1998). Bond strength of repaired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study. J Dent 26: 685-694.