Skip to main content
. 2010 May 25;15(5):625–633. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0426-6

Table 2.

Mean repair bond strengths (megapascals) for the four different composite resins after different aging conditions

Composite After IAR-application After SC-application
Non-aged control Thermocycling Water storage Citric acid immersion Non-aged control Thermocycling Water storage Citric acid immersion
AS 19.8 ± 4.6 a, A 2.8 ± 0.8 a, B 3.8 ± 2.6 a, B 13.8 ± 6.4 a, C, E 23.2 ± 1.3 a, A, D 18.7 ± 6.7 a, b, A 28.3 ± 7.4 a, D 11.4 ± 4.0 a, E
G 31.8 ± 5.7 b, A 10.4 ± 3.8 b, B 12.7 ± 3.7 b, B 13.7 ± 3.3 a, B 32.2 ± 4.2 b, A 23.0 ± 8.0 a, C 45.2 ± 5.0 b, D 13.8 ± 3.1 a, b, B
TE 22.2 ± 6.5 a, A 11.9 ± 2.4 b, B, E 8.4 ± 4.6 a, b, B 18.0 ± 7.1 a, b, A, F 20.0 ± 5.2 a, A, C 16.9 ± 6.5 b, C, E, F 32.2 ± 8.3 a, D 11.2 3.9 a, B
FS 27.6 ± 6.6 b, A, C 7.1 ± 3.1 a, b, B 13.0 ± 8.1 b,E 23.0 ± 9.8 b, C, F 29.2 ± 6.4 b, A 20.9 ± 7.1 a, b, D, F 21.7 ± 8.6 c, D, F 17.5 ± 6.9 b, D, E

Composite surfaces were either conditioned application of an intermediate adhesive resin (IAR) or silica coating (SC). ± denotes standard deviations over ten specimens. For abbreviations see Table 1

Same lowercase letters indicate an insignificant difference between the row; same uppercase letters denote an insignificant difference between the column