Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength between Amalgam and Composite: An in vitro Study

Document Type: Original Article


1 Associate Professor, Kerman Oral and Dental Diseases Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Kerman Oral and Dental Diseases Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Restorative Dentistry Department, School of Dentistry, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran

4 Dentist


Background & Aims: Repair of defective restoration is more conservative than replacing it. Veneering the amalgam restorations with opaque resin materials can satisfy the esthetic demands. Evaluation of interfacial bond quality between amalgam and composite surface is one of the important factors in assessing the quality of repaired amalgam which can be achieved by micro leakage test and bond strength test. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of introduced amalgam and also the bonding agent on shear bond strength of amalgam and composite interface.
Methods: First, 72 acrylic models (20*33 mm) were provided and categorized into two groups of A and B. we used Tytin (kerr,USA) amalgam in group A and Cinalux (Shahid faghihi, Tehran) amalgam in group B. Amalgam surface was scratched by using a diamond bur. All the groups were etched and rinsed. In A1 group, nothing was done after etching and rinsing. In A2 group, single bond and in A3 group Excite was used. B1, B2 and B3 groups were respectively prepared like A1, A2 and A3 groups. DenFil composite was used in all groups. Shear bond strength was assessed by using Universal testing machine. All the specimens were seen under stereo microscope (Olympus, Germany) with 75% magnification. Tukey HSD test was used for statistical analysis.
Results: In the groups which were filled with Tytin, A3 group had significantly higher bond strength than A1 group (P=0.001). In groups which were filled with Sinalux, B3 group had significantly higher bond strength than B1 and B2 groups (P=0.001 and 0.03 respectively). Bond strength was significantly higher in A1 compare to B1, A2 compare to B2, and A3 compared to B3 (P=0.001).
Conclusion: According to the obtained results, the type of introduced amalgam and also the bonding agent can affect shear bond strength of amalgam and composite interface. Tytin amalgam compared to Cinalux amalgam can create more shear bond strength. Also, excite bonding causes higher bond strength compared to single bond.


  1. Benitez Catirse AB, Oliveira Pagnano V, Da Silva Mello AS, Do Nascimento C, Mardegan Issa JP. Analysis of the diametral compressive bond strength between composite resin and amalgam in different stages of oxidation. Minerva Stomatol 2007; 56(4): 209-13.
  2. Ozcan M, Vallittu PK, Huysmans MC, Kalk W, Vahlberg T. Bond strength of resin composite to differently conditioned amalgam. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2006; 17(1):7-13.
  3. Pilo R, Nissan J, Shafir H, Shapira G, Alter E, Brosh T. The influence of long term water immersion on shear bond strength of amalgam repaired by resin composite and mediated by adhesives or resin modified glass ionomers. J Dent 2012; 40(7):594-602.
  4. Çehreli SB, Arhun N, Celik C. Amalgam Repair: Quantitative evaluation of amalgam-resin and resin-tooth interfaces with different surface treatments. Oper Dent 2010; 35(3): 337-44.
  5. Blum IR, Hafiana K, Curtis A, Barbour ME, Attin T, Lynch CD, Jagger DC. The effect of surface conditioning on the bond strength of resin composite to amalgam. J dent 2012; 40(1): 15-21.
  6. Ozcan M, Koolman C, Aladag A, Dündar M. Effects of different surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of composite resin to amalgam. Oper Dent 2011; 36(3):318-25.
  7. Gordon M, Laufer BZ, Metzger Z. Composite-veneered amalgam restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 54(6):759-62.
  8. Garcia-Barbero AE, Garcia-Barbero J, Lopez-Calvo JA. Bonding of amalgam to composite: tensile strength and morphology study. Dent Mater 1994; 10(2):83-7.
  9. Ozcan M, Schoonbeek G, Gökçe B, Cömlekoglu E, Dündar M. Bond strength comparison of amalgam repair protocols using resin composite in situations with and without dentin exposure. Oper Dent 2010; 35(6):655-62.
  10. Ulker M, Malkoc S, Ulker HE, Yalcin M, Malkoc M. Orthodontic bonding to high-copper amalgam with different adhesive cements. J Res Dent 2016; 4(1):7-10.
  11. Afshar H, Jafari A, Khami MR, Razeghi S. Evaluation of Microleakage in Composite-Composite and Amalgam-Composite Interfaces in Tooth with Preventive Resin Restoration (Ex-viva). J Dent (Tehran) 2012; 9(2):128-34.
  12. Machado C, Sanchez E, Alapati S, Seghi R, Johnston W. Shear bond strength of the amalgam-resin composite interface. Oper Dent 2007; 32(4):341-6.
  13. Diefenderfer KE, Reinhardt JW, Brown SB. Surface treatment effects on amalgam repair strength. Am J Dent 1997; 10(1):9-14.
  14. Moosavi Nasab M, Esmaeel Poor F. Comparison of the composition of cinalux amalgam with ADA standard. JDM 2002; 15(2):55-61.