﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<ArticleSet>
  <Article>
    <Journal>
      <PublisherName>Hamadan University of Medical Sciences</PublisherName>
      <JournalTitle>Avicenna Journal of Dental Research</JournalTitle>
      <Issn>2423-7582</Issn>
      <Volume>15</Volume>
      <Issue>3</Issue>
      <PubDate PubStatus="ppublish">
        <Year>2023</Year>
        <Month>09</Month>
        <DAY>30</DAY>
      </PubDate>
    </Journal>
    <ArticleTitle>Comparison of Repair Bond Strength of Bulk-fill and Conventional Composites With Different Bonding Systems</ArticleTitle>
    <FirstPage>97</FirstPage>
    <LastPage>102</LastPage>
    <ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.34172/ajdr.1611</ELocationID>
    <Language>EN</Language>
    <AuthorList>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Hafez</FirstName>
        <LastName>Vahedpour</LastName>
        <Identifier Source="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2027-5138</Identifier>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Hamid</FirstName>
        <LastName>Tavakkoli</LastName>
        <Identifier Source="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4591-9817</Identifier>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Zohreh</FirstName>
        <LastName>Mousavi</LastName>
        <Identifier Source="ORCID">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4866-2738</Identifier>
      </Author>
    </AuthorList>
    <PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
    <ArticleIdList>
      <ArticleId IdType="doi">10.34172/ajdr.1611</ArticleId>
    </ArticleIdList>
    <History>
      <PubDate PubStatus="received">
        <Year>2022</Year>
        <Month>04</Month>
        <Day>25</Day>
      </PubDate>
      <PubDate PubStatus="accepted">
        <Year>2022</Year>
        <Month>11</Month>
        <Day>26</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </History>
    <Abstract>Background: One of the advantages of resin composites as a restorative material is their repairability. The purpose of the current study was to compare the repair bond strength of conventional and bulk-fill composites with different bonding systems. Methods: In this in vitro study, sixty cylindrical specimens of materials were prepared according to the six groups under study (two types of conventional Gradia Direct and N-Ceram Bulk-Fill Tetric composites and three bonding systems: Single Bond Universal and Clearfil SE Bond and Single Bond 2). The samples were divided into 6 groups of 10 Single Bond/Gradia Direct composite (G1), Single Bond/Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill composite (G2), Clearfil SE bond/Gradia Direct (G3), Clearfil SE Bond/Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill composite (G4), single bond universal/Gradia Direct composite (G5), and Single Bond Universal/Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill composite (G6). Repair bond strength in each group was measured using the Universal Testing Machine (Hounsfield). All data were analyzed by SPSS 21 using ANOVA, Student’s t-test, and chi-square statistical tests (P&lt;0.05). Results: The highest and lowest bond strength (15.81±2.44 and 14.02±1.57, respectively) belonged to the Clearfil SE Bond-Tetric N-Ceram and Single Bond (Etch &amp; Rinse)-Gradia Direct groups, respectively. The ANOVA test results demonstrated no significant difference in the bonding strengths of the study groups (P=0.537). Conclusions: Bulk-fill composite Tetric N-Ceram, apart from the bonding system, had higher repair bond strength compared to the conventional Gradia Direct composite. It seems that self-etch bonding systems (Clearfil SE Bond and Single Bond Universal) have had more bond strength than etch and rinse bonding (Single Bond 2 bonds).</Abstract>
    <ObjectList>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">Bulk-fill composite</Param>
      </Object>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">Conventional composites</Param>
      </Object>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">Shear bond strength</Param>
      </Object>
    </ObjectList>
  </Article>
</ArticleSet>