{rfName}
In

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

33

Altmetrics

Grant support

The authors declared no conflict of interest. The study was financially supported by art. 83 (URJC-VOCO GmbH/A-232).

Analysis of institutional authors

Baena E.AuthorFuentes M.v.AuthorCeballos L.Author

Share

June 21, 2024
Publications
>
Article
No

Influence of repair procedure on composite-to-composite microtensile bond strength

Publicated to:American Journal Of Dentistry. 28 (5): 255-260 - 2015-10-01 28(5), DOI:

Authors: Baena, Eugenia; Victoria Fuentes, Maria; Ceballos, Laura

Affiliations

- Author
Rey Juan Carlos Univ, Dept Stomatol & Nursing, Madrid, Spain - Author

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the effect of different repair procedures and storage time on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of a resin composite to an older one from a simulated previous restoration. Methods: Composite disks were made by layering 2 mm-thick increments of a nanohybrid composite (Grandio) shade Al in a Teflon mold (4×8 mm). Afterwards, they were light-cured and stored (37°C/7 days) in a saline solution. Specimens were randomly divided into groups according to the surface treatment applied: (1) Composite surface was roughened with a bur (Cimara) and Solobond Plus adhesive was applied; (2) Sandblasting with 27 μrn aluminum oxide particles (KaVo Rondoflex), and adhesive application; (3) Air-abrasion with 30 μm alumina particles coated with silica (CoJet Sand), silane (Monobond-S) and adhesive application; (4) Negative control group with only adhesive application. Afterwards, Grandio composite (shade A3.5) was packed incrementally on the treated surface obtaining another disk (4×8 mm). Repaired blocks were stored (24 hours or 6 months) and afterwards μTBS test was performed and failure mode was evaluated. Also, beams obtained from 8 mm-high composite blocks without any surface treatment were immediately submitted to μTBS test to determine Grandio composite cohesive bond strength (positive control group). Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (P<0.05). Results: The repair procedure affected μTBS values (P< 0.001) while neither storage time nor interactions did (P> 0.05). All repair procedures achieved bond strength values higher than the negative control group but they did not reach the composite's cohesive bond strength. The overall conclusion was that an increased superficial roughness by means of a bur, silica coating or alumina sandblasting improved μTBS of the repaired composite and bond strength remained stable after 6 months.

Keywords

Adhesive filling materialsAdhesivenessAgentsAir abrasionAluminum oxideComposite resinsDegradationDental bondingDental cementsDental etchingDental materialsDental restoration repairGrandioHumansHybrid resinLight-curing of dental adhesivesLongevityMaterials testingMethacrylatesMinimal interventionMonobond sNanocompositesRandom allocationResin-dentin bondsRestorationsSilanesSilicon dioxideSodium chlorideSolobond plus adhesiveStress, mechanicalSurface conditioning methodsSurface propertiesTemperatureTensile strengthTime factors

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal American Journal Of Dentistry due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2015, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Dentistry (Miscellaneous).

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 1.02. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 1.4 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-08-05, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 21
  • Scopus: 25
  • Europe PMC: 12

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (Baena Aguilera, Eugenia María) and Last Author (Ceballos García, Laura).