Literature DB >> 20582218

Role of oxygen inhibited layer on shear bond strength of composites.

Sheetal Ghivari1, Manoj Chandak, Narendra Manvar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Rising demand for aesthetic adhesive restorations has led to wide use of composites. A multilayer technique is recommended for success of these restorations. The surface layer of composite coming in contact with air forms a superficial sticky layer called oxygen inhibited layer, upon polymerization, allowing resins from both sides to cross the interface and form an interdiffusion zone. The present study was sought to test whether oxygen inhibited layer increases or decreases the shear bond strength at the interface of composites.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A microhybrid composite Esthetic -X (Dentsply, Caulk) was used in this study. A cylindrical mold of composite, five mm thick and eight mm long, was prepared and embedded in acrylic resin molds after curing. This was placed in distilled water for two hours and sheared in universal testing machine at a cross head speed of one mm/sec. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data analyzed statistically to determine the significant difference between the groups. Mean and standard deviation values were estimated for the study groups and compared by one way ANOVA.
RESULTS: No significant difference in shear bond strength of composites cured with and with out oxygen inhibited layer.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence or absence of oxygen inhibited layer made no significant difference in shear bond strength of composite resins.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Composites; oxygen inhibited layer; shear bond strength

Year:  2010        PMID: 20582218      PMCID: PMC2883806          DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.62635

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Conserv Dent        ISSN: 0972-0707


INTRODUCTION

Typically, dental composites are random copolymers of Bis – GMA [4,-(2, hydroxy-3-methacryloxypropoxy) phenyl] propane (Bis-GMA), triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TEDGMA) and filled with various inorganic filler particles. Bis-GMA and TEGMA are bifunctional monomers that harden by free radicle induced polymerization. This reaction is strongly inhibited by free radicle scavengers such as oxygen.[12] The inhibition resulting from oxygen diffusing from atmosphere into curing resin is responsible for formation of a soft, sticky superficial layer on freshly polymerized resin, referred to as oxygen inhibited layer.[2-4] Oxygen inhibited layer is always present when bonding agent or composite is polymerized in air. The oxygen inhibited layer is primarily composed of unreacted monomers and oligomers and possesses a liquid-like consistency. This layer not only readily adopts the overlying material to increase contacting area but also allows materials on both sides to cross the interface and blend together to form an interdiffused zone where copolymerization can take place to produce a chemical bond. All these actions will tend to strengthen layer-layer interaction.[5] For years it was a common perception that an oxygen- inhibited layer is required before adding more layers of bonded composite. Based on the principle of molecular interaction, one might easily reason that an oxygen-inhibited layer should improve the interfacial bonding between two contacting polymers.[6-7] Reports on how the oxygen-inhibited layer affects bond strength have been inconsistent. A few studies reported that the presence of an oxygen-inhibited layer made no significant differences to bond strength.[8-9] This study aimed to evaluate whether the presence of oxygen inhibited layer increases or decreases the shear bond strength.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Resin composites used in this study were Esthetic–X (Dentsply, Caulk) which is micro hybrid and samples were cured in Q-Lux (Dentsply) curing unit for 20 seconds per layer. Sixteen composite samples with standard dimensions of five mm (diameter), and eight mm (height) were prepared. Samples were embedded in acrylic resin blocks so that the interface of two increments is at resin substrate junction to facilitate testing in universal testing machine. Each sample consisted of two layers of four mm each cured for 20 seconds. Samples were divided into two groups of eight samples each. Group 1 (n is equal to eight) – Presence of oxygen inhibited layer. Samples were prepared by placing first increment of composite in a gelatine capsule without cellophane strip and cured, subsequent layer of composite added by pushing the first increment in gelatine capsule so that oxygen inhibited layer is in between the subsequent increments of four mm. Group 2 (n = 8) – Absence of oxygen inhibited layer. Samples were prepared as above and cured in gelatine capsule with cellophane strip between the subsequent increments of 4 mm. After photo polymerization the samples were conditioned in distilled water for two hours and specimens were sheared to failure in universal testing machine (Model 4466, Instron Inc., Canton, MA, USA) at cross head speed of 1 mm/min. Bond strength calculated = F (force)/A (area). A = Πr2,; A= cross sectional area of interface, r = Radius of sample. The average bond strength for each group was calculated.

RESULTS

Data was analyzed between both the groups to determine the significant difference between them. Mean and standard deviation values were estimated for the study groups and compared by one way ANOVA. Group 1 consisting of composite samples cured with oxygen inhibited layer showed no significant difference in shear bond strength compared to group 2 cured without oxygen inhibited layer (NS, P > 0.05) at the interface between the increments.

DISCUSSION

Dental composites are widely used esthetic restorative materials in dentistry. To minimize polymerization shrinkage and increase the degree of conversion, multilayer technique is recommended for ultimate success of composite; bond strength between different layers becomes important.[13,14] However, during polymerization the free oxygen in contact with composite resin diffuses and inhibits polymerization reaction forming peroxide radicals which have low reactivity towards monomers. The free monomer layer will remain on the surface after curing as reactivity of oxygen is much higher with radicle than with monomer. This free monomer layer remaining on the surface after curing is known as oxygen inhibited layer and always formed when composites are polymerized in presence of air. Studies have shown a positive correlation indicating oxygen inhibited layer increases bond strength by formation of covalent bond within interpenetrating network.[67] However, a few studies state that oxygen inhibited layer is detrimental to bond strength due to its brittleness.[10-12] Some recent studies have concluded that oxygen inhibited layer made no significant difference in bond strength.[83] In the present study shear bond strength of composite resin (Esthetic–X) was measured with or without oxygen inhibited layer. It is found that presence of oxygen inhibited layer made no significant difference in shear bond strength. The resin in the oxygen inhibited layer has the same composition as the uncured resin, except that the photoinitiator system, commonly camphorquinone (CQ) and amine, has been consumed or decomposed.[10] The rate of CQ decomposition was found to be irradiation energy dependant. A comparison of results showed that the CQ half-life decreases with higher-intensity irradiation. The oxygen inhibited layer contains significantly reduced levels of CQ photo initiator. They also imply that a long curing time may negatively impact the ability of the oxygen inhibited layer to be post-cured. Extremely high thickness of the oxygen-inhibited layer of traditional composites (37 plus/minus16 mm) prevented effective interdiffusion of fresh composite (photoinitiator) into the inhibited layer, resulting in under polymerization and lower bond strength.[5]

Esthetics-X

X hybrid composite used in present study composed of Phenyl propandion (PPD) as initiator and filler particle size is smaller compared to traditional macrofilled composites. It has been found that interfacial bond strength decreases as filler loading changes from highly filled to microfilled.[12] Increased oxygen solubility of uncured resin due to absorption of oxygen on to surface of filler particles may provoke decrease in conversion at composite/atmosphere interface this confirm filler particles may influence bond strength. According to a study by Byoung, with advancement in composite material and photoinitiator systems (nanofilled composites) the thickness of the oxygen-inhibited layer was recently measured to be much less than six μm (Bisco data on file). With a lower thickness of oxygen inhibited layer, it is possible to completely interdiffuse the oxygen-inhibited layer with fresh composite overlay, resulting in normal bond strength.[5] This study used micro hybrid composite with improved photoinitiator and reduced filler particle size as compared to conventional composites, reducing the thickness of oxygen inhibited layer by complete interdiffusion of oxygen inhibited layer with fresh composite overlay. Taking these observations into consideration it can be concluded that the presence or absence of oxygen inhibited layer does not have influence on bond strength.

CONCLUSION

Under the limitations of the present study and contrary to common perception, it can be concluded that the presence of oxygen inhibited layer made no significant difference in shear bond strength of composite resins.
GroupnmeanStd. deviationStd. error meanT valueP value
186.210.650.231.460.16
285.610.970.97NS, P>0.05
  10 in total

1.  Effect of the reducing agent on the oxygen-inhibited layer of the cross-linked reline material.

Authors:  M Yatabe; H Seki; N Shirasu; M Sone
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.837

2.  Interfacial layer characterization in dental composite.

Authors:  D Truffier-Boutry; E Place; J Devaux; G Leloup
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.837

3.  The strength of layering technique in visible light-cured composites.

Authors:  G C Eliades; A A Caputo
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 3.426

4.  Laboratory evaluation of surface treatments for composite repair.

Authors:  K A Kupiec; W W Barkmeier
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  1996 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.440

5.  Oxygen-inhibited layer in adhesion dentistry.

Authors:  Byoung In Suh
Journal:  J Esthet Restor Dent       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.843

6.  Oxygen inhibition in dental resins.

Authors:  M A Gauthier; I Stangel; T H Ellis; X X Zhu
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 6.116

7.  Dentin-polymer bond promoted by Gluma and various resins.

Authors:  E C Munksgaard; M Irie; E Asmussen
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 6.116

8.  The effect of oxygen inhibition on an unfilled/filled composite system.

Authors:  F A Rueggeberg; D H Margeson
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 6.116

9.  Monomers with low oxygen inhibition as enamel/dentin adhesives.

Authors:  W J Finger; K S Lee; W Podszun
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 5.304

10.  Effect of primer solvent and curing mode on dentin shear bond strength and interface morphology.

Authors:  Elisa Velazquez; Jayalakshmi Vaidyanathan; Tritala K Vaidyanathan; Milton Houpt; Zia Shey; Stanley Von Hagen
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.677

  10 in total
  7 in total

1.  Effect of thermocycling on the bond strength of composite resin to bur and laser treated composite resin.

Authors:  Özden Özel Bektas; Digdem Eren; Seyda Herguner Siso; Gulsah E Akin
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2011-07-16       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Influence of surface treatment and curing mode of resin composite cements on fibroblast behavior.

Authors:  Nadja Rohr; Celina Baumann; Sabrina Märtin; Nicola U Zitzmann
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 2.246

3.  Effect of polymerisation and ageing on the incremental bond strength of ormocer-based dental materials.

Authors:  Daniel Awad; Nicoleta Ilie
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Effect of Different Finishing and Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Resin Composite and Enamel: An In vitro Profilometric and Scanning Electron Microscopy Study.

Authors:  Karan Bansal; Sachin Gupta; Vineeta Nikhil; Shikha Jaiswal; Akanksha Jain; Neha Aggarwal
Journal:  Int J Appl Basic Med Res       Date:  2019 Jul-Sep

5.  Oxygen inhibition layer: A dilemma to be solved.

Authors:  Aarti C Panchal; Geeta Asthana
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2020-12-04

6.  Comparative evaluation of efficacy of two minimally invasive caries removal techniques on fracture resistance of the teeth restored with composite: An SEM study.

Authors:  Manjula Kittur; Sheetal Ghivari; Madhu Pujar
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2021-10-09

7.  Finishing and Polishing of Composite Restoration: Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Among Various Dental Professionals in India.

Authors:  Sankar Vishwanath; Sadasiva Kadandale; Senthil Kumar Kumarappan; Anupama Ramachandran; Manu Unnikrishnan; Honap Manjiri Nagesh
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-01-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.