Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of dentin bonding agents and silanization on the bond strength between 3D printed resin and composite resin and compare it with a conventional composite resin. 3D printed resin cylinders (PCB) and composite resin substrates (Z250) were prepared and divided into eight subgroups based on the bonding agents used (n=12). The shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine, and the failure modes were evaluated. The bond strength was found to vary significantly among the bonding agents and substrate types. Silane application did not significantly improve the bond strength. Among the bonding agents, the universal adhesives exhibited the highest bond strengths for both substrates. Compared to PCB, Z250 demonstrated stronger bonds and exhibited more cohesive failures. Further research is needed to optimize the surface treatments and resin formulations for enhanced bond strength and durability between 3D printed and composite resins.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2023-181 | DOI Listing |