The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2019 ) > List of Articles


Bond Strength of Composite Resin Restoration Repair: Influence of Silane and Adhesive Systems

Natália C Gutierrez, Sabrina E Moecke, Taciana MF Caneppele, Letícia CCC Perote, Graziela R Batista, Maria FRL Huhtalla, Carlos RG Torres

Keywords : Adhesive system, Composite resin repair, Laboratory research, Tensile bond strength

Citation Information : Gutierrez NC, Moecke SE, Caneppele TM, Perote LC, Batista GR, Huhtalla MF, Torres CR. Bond Strength of Composite Resin Restoration Repair: Influence of Silane and Adhesive Systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (8):880-886.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2632

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-08-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of silane (Si) application and different adhesive systems on the bond strength of composite resin repair. Materials and methods: One hundred composite truncated cone-shaped specimens were prepared and submitted to 5,000 thermal cycles to simulate existing restorations. Their top surfaces were airborne particle abraded with aluminum oxide, etched with phosphoric acid, and divided into two groups (n = 50) with or without Si application. Each group was divided into five subgroups (n = 10) according to the adhesive system applied: Solobond Plus Primer and Adhesive (SPA)—two-bottle, Solobond Plus adhesive (SA), Admira Bond (A)—one bottle, Futurabond DC (FDC)—self-etch, and Futurabond M (FM)—self-etch. New composite resin was applied over the bonded area. A control group was prepared to evaluate the cohesive strength of the composite resin. Specimens were submitted to tensile stress. Data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the Tukey and Dunnett tests. Results: Si application reduced the bond strength of all adhesives (p = 0.001). Groups SA and SPA showed higher bond strengths in relation to other groups (p = 0.01). Groups FDC + Si, FM, FM + Si, and A + Si showed smaller mean bond strength values than that of the control group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Previous Si application reduced bond strength values. The two-bottle adhesive showed better results than one-bottle or self-etching systems for composite resin repairs. Clinical significance: The kind of adhesive system applied for composite resin repairs has a great influence on bond strength values. The use of Si in this situation is not recommended.

PDF Share
  1. Joiner A, Hopkinson I, et al. A review of tooth colour and whiteness. J Dent 2008;365:52–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.02.001.
  2. Leinfelder KF. Posterior composite resins: the materials and their clinical performance. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126(5):663–664. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1995.0247.
  3. Baur V, Ilie N. Repair of dental resin-based composites. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:601–608. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0722-4.
  4. Gordan Dds VV, Mjör Bds IA, et al. Teaching students the repair of resin-based composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134: 317–323. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0160.
  5. Özcan M, Barbosa SH, et al. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions. Dent Mater 2007;23:1276–1282. DOI: 10.1016/
  6. Krejci I, Lieber CM, et al. Time required to remove totally bonded tooth-colored posterior restorations and related tooth substance loss. Dent Mater 1995;11:34–40. DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(95) 80006-9.
  7. Özcan M, Pekkan G. Effect of Different Adhesion Strategies on Bond Strength of Resin Composite to Composite-dentin Complex. Oper Dent 2013;38(1):63–72. DOI: 10.2341/11-482-L.
  8. Brosh T, Pilo R, et al. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77(2):122–126. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(97) 70224-5.
  9. Özcan M, Corazza PH, et al. Repair bond strength of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled resin composites: Effect of substrate resin type, surface conditioning and ageing. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1751–1758. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0863-5.
  10. Gomes Torres CR, Da Silva TM, et al. Influence of chemical degradation and toothbrushing on surface of composites. World J Dent 2015;6(2):65–70. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1316.
  11. Ferracane JL, Marker VA. Solvent degradation and reduced fracture toughness in aged composites. J Dent Res 1992;71(1):13–19. DOI: 10.1177/00220345920710010101.
  12. McKinney JE, Wu W. Chemical softening and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res 1985;64(11):1326–1331. DOI: 10.1177/00220345850640111601.
  13. Li J. Effects of surface properties on bond strength between layers of newly cured dental composites. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24:358–360.
  14. Kupiec KA, Barkmeier WW. Laboratory evaluation of surface treatments for composite repair. Oper Dent 1996;21(2):59–62.
  15. Pounder B, Gregory WA, et al. Bond strengths of repaired composite resins. Oper Dent 1987;12(3):127–131.
  16. Hisamatsu N, Atsuta M, et al. Effect of silane primers and unfilled resin bonding agents on repair bond strength of a prosthodontic microfilled composite. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:644–648. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00899.x.
  17. Ortengren U, Wellendorf H, et al. Water sorption and solubility of dental composites and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:1106–1115. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00802.x.
  18. Tezvergil A, Lassila LVJ, et al. Composite-composite repair bond strength: Effect of different adhesion primers. J Dent 2003;31:521–525. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00093-9.
  19. Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, et al. Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 2009;25:442–451. DOI: 10.1016/
  20. Fawzy AS, El-Askary FS, et al. Effect of surface treatments on the tensile bond strength of repaired water-aged anterior restorative micro-fine hybrid resin composite. J Dent 2008;36:969–976. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.07.014.
  21. Söderholm KJ, Roberts MJ. Variables influencing the repair strength of dental composites. Scand J Dent Res 1991;99(2):173–180. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1991.tb01881.x.
  22. Amaral F, Colucci V, et al. Assessment of in vitro methods used to promote adhesive interface degradation: A critical review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19:340–354. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00134.x.
  23. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/TS 11405 Dental materials — Testing of adhesion to tooth structure. 2003.
  24. Hannig C, Laubach S, et al. Shear bond strength of repaired adhesive filling materials using different repair procedures. J Adhes Dent 2006;8(1):35–40.
  25. Da Costa TRF, Serrano AM, et al. Durability of composite repair using different surface treatments. J Dent 2012;40:513–521. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.03.001.
  26. Cho S, Rajitrangson P, et al. Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, Air Abrasion, and Silane Application on Repaired Shear Bond Strength of Composites. Oper Dent 2013;38(3):58–66. DOI: 10.2341/11-054-L.
  27. Lung CYK, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: An overview. Dent Mater 2012;28(5):467–477. DOI: 10.1016/
  28. El-Askary FS, El-Banna AH, et al. Immediate vs delayed repair bond strength of a nanohybrid resin composite. J Adhes Dent 2012;14(3):265–274.
  29. Park SJ, Jin JS. Effect of silane coupling agent on mechanical interfacial properties of glass fiber-reinforced unsaturated polyester composites. J Polym Sci Part B Polym Phys 2001;242:174–179.
  30. Papacchini F, Monticelli F, et al. The application of hydrogen peroxide in composite repair. J Biomed Mater Res—Part B Appl Biomater 2007;82:298–304. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30733.
  31. Sanares AME, Itthagarun A, et al. Adverse surface interactions between one-bottle light-cured adhesives and chemical-cured composites. Dent Mater 2001;17:542–556. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00016-1.
  32. Cadenaro M, Antoniolli F, et al. Degree of conversion and permeability of dental adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci 2005;113:525–530. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00251.x.
  33. Sezinando A. Looking for the ideal adhesive—A review. Rev Port Estomatol Med Dentária e Cir Maxilofac 2014;5(4):194–206.
  34. Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, et al. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 2007;28(26):3757–3785. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.04.044.
  35. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Microtensile bond strengths of one- and two-step self-etch adhesives to bur-cut enamel and dentin. Am J Dent 2003;16(6):414–420.
  36. Yiu CKY, Pashley EL, et al. Solvent and water retention in dental adhesive blends after evaporation. Biomaterials 2005;26(34): 6863–6872. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.05.011.
  37. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, et al. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011;27:17–28. DOI: 10.1016/
  38. Bail M, Malacarne-Zanon J, et al. Effect of air-drying on the solvent evaporation, degree of conversion and water sorption/solubility of dental adhesive models. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2012;23(3):629–638. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-011-4541-y.
  39. Spreafico D, Semeraro S, et al. The effect of the air-blowing step on the technique sensitivity of four different adhesive systems. J Dent 2006;34(3):237–244. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005. 06.004.
  40. Miyazaki M, Platt JA, et al. Influence of dentin primer application methods on dentin bond strength. Oper Dent 1996;21(4): 167–172.
  41. Wiegand A, Stawarczyk B, et al. Repair of silorane composite-Using the same substrate or a methacrylate-based composite? Dent Mater 2012;28(3):19–25. DOI: 10.1016/
  42. Rathke A, Tymina Y, et al. Effect of different surface treatments on the composite-composite repair bond strength. Clin Oral Investig 2009;13(3):317–323. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-008-0228-2.
  43. Ferracane JL. Resin composite—State of the art. Dent Mater 2011;27:29–38. DOI: 10.1016/
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.