PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of pre-repair aging periods and intermediate adhesive systems based on different monomers on the repair bond strength of silorane-based resin composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 Filtek P90 (3M ESPE) substrate specimens (4 mm diameter and 4 mm height) were made. Substrate specimens were grouped according to the pre-repair time periods into four groups (n = 8/group): 15 to 30 min, 24 h, 1 month, and 3 months. All substrate specimens were ground flat using a diamond stone and were etched using Scotchbond phosphoric acid etchant (3M ESPE). The specimens of each pre-repair time period were equally distributed among the two repair groups, using either silorane-based (P90 System Adhesive) or acrylamide-based (AdheSE One F, Ivoclar Vivadent) intermediate adhesive systems. Specimens of P90 System adhesive received Filtek P90 as the repair resin composite, and Tetric N-Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) was used with AdheSE One F specimens. Additional specimens were made from the repair resin composite materials to study the cohesive strength. Specimens were sliced into sticks (0.6 ± 0.01 mm2) for microtensile bond strength testing (μTBS). Modes of failure were determined. RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures revealed no significant effect for the pre-repair aging periods, intermediate adhesive systems based on different monomers, or their interaction on repair bond strength of silorane-based resin composite. CONCLUSION: Up to 3 months of pre-aging the repaired silorane-based resin composite had no negative effect on its repair bond strength, even when an intermediate adhesive system based on a different monomer (acrylamide) was used.
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of pre-repair aging periods and intermediate adhesive systems based on different monomers on the repair bond strength of silorane-based resin composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 Filtek P90 (3M ESPE) substrate specimens (4 mm diameter and 4 mm height) were made. Substrate specimens were grouped according to the pre-repair time periods into four groups (n = 8/group): 15 to 30 min, 24 h, 1 month, and 3 months. All substrate specimens were ground flat using a diamond stone and were etched using Scotchbond phosphoric acid etchant (3M ESPE). The specimens of each pre-repair time period were equally distributed among the two repair groups, using either silorane-based (P90 System Adhesive) or acrylamide-based (AdheSE One F, Ivoclar Vivadent) intermediate adhesive systems. Specimens of P90 System adhesive received Filtek P90 as the repair resin composite, and Tetric N-Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) was used with AdheSE One F specimens. Additional specimens were made from the repair resin composite materials to study the cohesive strength. Specimens were sliced into sticks (0.6 ± 0.01 mm2) for microtensile bond strength testing (μTBS). Modes of failure were determined. RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures revealed no significant effect for the pre-repair aging periods, intermediate adhesive systems based on different monomers, or their interaction on repair bond strength of silorane-based resin composite. CONCLUSION: Up to 3 months of pre-aging the repaired silorane-based resin composite had no negative effect on its repair bond strength, even when an intermediate adhesive system based on a different monomer (acrylamide) was used.