Purpose: To compare the shear-bond-strength (SBS) of a highly-filled-flowable composite (HFFC) and a paste-type composite for indirect composite repair and to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments (ST), concerning the composite repair protocol.
Methods: Eighty-four 5 × 5 × 2 mm cylindrical specimens were prepared using Gradia Plus and SR Nexco indirect composite materials. The samples were thermocycled 5,000 times. According to the ST, the samples were divided into three groups (control, bur, and air-abrasion). After ST, the sample subgroups were divided into two sub-groups according to the repair material: paste-type composite and HFFC (n = 7). Another 5,000 cycles of aging were performed. SBS values were measured with a universal testing machine (Shimadzu, Japan). Shapiro-Wilk, 3-way ANOVA, and Tukey HSD test were used to evaluate data (P < 0.05).
Results: ST was considered significant for SBS (P < 0.001). The mean values were (13.9 ± 5.7), (17.0 ± 6.4), (20.4 ± 4.9) MPa for the control, bur and phosphoric acid, and air-abrasion groups, respectively. The surface treatment and repair material interaction was considered significant for SBS (P = 0.044). The highest mean bond strength (24.5 ± 4.5 MPa) was observed for the interaction of SR Nexco, air-abrasion ST, and HFFC repair.
Conclusion: Repairing with HFFC following air abrasion might enhance the SBS for indirect composite restorations.
Keywords: air abrasion; composite repair; flowable composite; shear bond strength.