Shear Bond Strength of Biointeractive Restorative Materials to NeoMTA Plus and Biodentine

生物活性修复材料与NeoMTA Plus和Biodentine的剪切粘接强度

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The bonding compatibility between calcium silicate-based bioceramic cements and restorative materials is critical for long-term success in pediatric dentistry. This study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) of contemporary biointeractive restorative materials to two widely used bioceramics, NeoMTA Plus (NM) and Biodentine (BD). METHODS: Eighty acrylic resin blocks with standardized cavities were filled with either NM or BD (n = 40 each) and subdivided into four restorative groups: nanohybrid composite (Filtek Ultimate), giomer (Beautifil II), bioactive restorative (Activa BioActive Restorative), and high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (Fuji IX GP Extra) (n = 10 each). All restorations followed a standardized etch-and-bond protocol. SBS was measured using a universal testing machine, and failure modes were assessed under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (p < 0.05). RESULTS: BD exhibited significantly higher SBS values than NM (p < 0.001). In the BD group, Filtek Ultimate and Beautifil II achieved the highest and statistically comparable SBS, outperforming Activa BioActive Restorative and Fuji IX GP Extra (p < 0.05). In the NM group, no significant differences were found among materials. Adhesive failures predominated in NM (85%), while BD showed more cohesive failures (50%). CONCLUSIONS: Biodentine demonstrated superior bonding stability to restorative materials, with composite resin and giomer performing best. Giomer's bioactivity and ion release make it a viable alternative to composite resin in suitable clinical contexts.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。