The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of microshear (μSBS) and microtensile (μTBS) bond strength tests on composite repairs using universal adhesives with or without the application of additional silane. Cylindrical (μSBS) and block-shaped (μTBS) specimens were fabricated using nanofilled (F–Filtek One Bulk Fill) and nanohybrid (T-Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill) bulk-fill composites. The specimens were aged by thermocycling (5,000 cycles, 5–55 °C), sandblasted, and then divided into three groups (n = 30) as follows: non-repaired (FC and TC), repaired with universal adhesives (FA, Scotchbond Universal; and TA, Adhese Universal), and with the previous application of silane (FS and TS). After 48 h, the specimens were repaired using the same composite. The μSBS and μTBS specimens exhibited bonded areas of 1 mm² and were subjected to shear stress and tension until failure, at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min in a universal testing machine. Weibull analyses and Pearson correlation (α = 0.05) were applied to the data. At characteristic strength, FC, FA, and FS exhibited significantly higher μSBS when compared with TA and TS (p < 0.05). However when tested by μTBS at the same parameter, FA presented significantly lower bond strength when compared to FC, FS, and TA (p < 0.05). The correlation between Weibull modulus was strongly negative and not significant (p > 0.05). Both bond strength tests exhibited a material-dependent behavior. The microtensile bond strength test demonstrated more reliability than the microshear test for composite repair evaluation.

这项研究的目的是评估在使用或不使用其他硅烷的情况下，使用通用粘合剂进行复合材料修复的微剪切（μSBS）和微拉伸（μTBS）粘结强度测试的可靠性。圆柱形（μSBS）和块状（μTBS）样品是使用纳米填充（F–Filtek一次填充）和纳米混合（T-Tetric EvoCeram批量填充）复合材料制成的。通过热循环（5,000个循环，5–55°C）对标本进行时效处理，喷砂处理，然后分为三组（n = 30），方法如下：未修复（FC和TC），用通用胶粘剂（FA，Scotchbond）修复通用；以及TA，通用粘合剂），以及以前使用的硅烷（FS和TS）。48小时后，使用相同的复合材料修复标本。μSBS和μTBS样品的结合面积为1 mm ²在万能试验机中以0.5 mm / min的十字头速度经受剪切应力和拉力直至失效。数据采用Weibull分析和Pearson相关（α= 0.05）。与TA和TS相比，在特征强度下，FC，FA和FS表现出明显更高的μSBS（p <0.05）。但是，当通过μTBS在相同参数下进行测试时，与FC，FS和TA相比，FA表现出明显更低的结合强度（p <0.05）。威布尔模量之间的相关性是强烈的负相关且不显着（p> 0.05）。两种粘合强度测试均表现出与材料有关的行为。对于复合材料修复评估，微拉伸粘合强度测试显示出比微剪切测试更高的可靠性。