Evaluation of Micro-Tensile Bond Strength of Fibre Post with Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles as Fillers in Experimental Dental Composite Resin
, Mavishna Maniyan Vijayakumari 2, Pradeep Kumar Yadalam 3, Nezar Boreak 4, Sultan Binalrimal 5, Saeed M. Alqahtani 6, Mohammed Hussain Dafer Al Wadei 7, Thilla Sekar Vinothkumar 4,8, Hitesh Chohan 4, Harisha Dewan 9, Shilpa Bhandi 4 and Shankargouda Patil 10,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this study, the bond strength of fiber posts with titanium dioxide nanoparticles as fillers to dental composite resin was evaluated. Some comments are given:
Materials and Methods
1. p.3 of 12, line 112, could you give the details of the silane coupling agent used?
2. p.3 of 12, what are the details of silanization of amorphous silica, aluminum silicate fillers, and titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NP)
3. The BisGMA was preheated to 500C. Please check 500C or 50C. The temperature could be too high.
4. Only dry groups were measured. No artificial aged groups were measured. It is recommended to add artificial aged groups, e.g., thermocycling to examine if the bond strength is affected compared with the dry groups.
Results
1. The nanoparticle size of TiO2 was 250-300nm. However, in Fig. 1, the size was 40 nm. Please check. Please also move the Fig. 1 to Results section.
2. Fig. 1 should be in the Results section.
Discussion
1. p. 9 of 12, “Silane was applied to the post before luting with the resin cement. The silane coupling agent will improve the adherence of the resin cement with the post layer.”. Please check the procedure as you used silanized fillers but you did not mention “silane was applied to the post before luting with the resin cement:.
2. p. 9 of 12, “ …… by Asim Al-Ansari et al (2015).”. Please check different reference format was used. Please also check others.
3. p. 9 of 12, “Studies have shown that increasing the percentage of fillers above 5% resulted in the loss of bond strength with the tooth structure [15].” In their study, the highest bond strength is 0% TiO2 NPs added. The bond strength is decreased from 1% to 10% of TiO2 NPs added. Therefore, you may need to prepare a test group with 10% of TiO2 NPs added to examine the bond strength is decreased with increasing the TiO2 NPs added.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This study examined the bond strength between a FRC post and an experimental resin composite core material contained titanium dioxide nanoparticles, and compared it with the bond strengths between a FRC post and 2 kinds of commercially available resin composite core materials.
The results showed that the bond strength of the experimental resin composite core to FRC post was significantly higher than that of other commercially available resin composite core to FRC post. This result suggests availability of titanium dioxide nanoparticles for strengthening adhesion of resin composite core material to a FRC post.
However, this study might possess several concerns.
Major concerns
The authors prepared the specimens using extracted human teeth for adhesion test; however, the teeth might be unnecessary because the authors measured only bond strength between a FRC post and resin composite core materials. To examine bond strength between FRC post and resin composite core, the authors can prepare using FRC post and resin composite core material without tooth.
Although the experimental resin composite core material is packable type, both commercially available resin composite core materials are flowable type. This difference might affect the bond strength between the FRC post and the resin composite core materials.
Two commercially available resin composite core materials used in this study showed the bond strength of more than 19 MPa to the FRC post. These high bond strengths seem to be enough to apply them for fabricating resin composite core with a post in clinic. Is there any reason that their bond strengths shown in this study would be inadequate for clinical use?
In this study, the data were obtained after short-term storage of 2 weeks. Recently, research for adhesion of dental materials demands data obtained after long-term preservation of specimens. Two weeks storage is too short to evaluate the bond strength available in clinic.
Miner concerns
The size of beam specimen used in the microtensile bond strength test was unclear.
SEM picture shown in Fig. 4 does not seem adhesive failure, because both sites of resin composite and post exist on the failure surface. In general, either resin composite site or post site appears on the SEM picture in case of adhesive failure.
There were some mis-typings.
Author Response
please kindly refer to the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
A minor comment:
For the Abstract, please add "All test groups were submitted to thermocycling." before " After that, the samples were tested for micro tensile bond strength. A stereomicroscope with a magnification of 20x was used to examine fractured surfaces."
Author Response
Reviewer 1:
|
S.No |
Queries |
Comments |
Page no: |
|
1 |
For the Abstract, please add "All test groups were submitted to thermocycling." before " After that, the samples were tested for micro tensile bond strength. A stereomicroscope with a magnification of 20x was used to examine fractured surfaces."
|
All test groups were submitted to thermocycling – the sentence was added in the abstract |
1 |
Reviewer 2:
|
S.No |
Queries |
Comments |
Page no: |
|
|
There are many paragraphs in the Introduction section. Several paragraphs should be combined according to their common contents. |
Paragraph combination done in the introduction |
2 |
|
|
The specimen size for micro-TBS should be described.
|
The specimen dimension of 0.5to 1.0mm thickness was mentioned |
5 |
|
|
The word of “shear bond strength” appears at many spots in the manuscript. Please check and change them into “microtensile bond strength”.
|
Shear bond strength was changes to microtensile bond strength in all the manuscript |
ALL |
|
|
Table 3 and Chart 1 are unnecessary because the results of statistical analysis shown in Table 3 can explain by sentence, and Chart 1 exhibits same content with Table 2.
|
Chart 1 removed |
|
|
|
In Figure 2, the illustration of specimen view is improper. Please remake it.
|
New figure 2 with illustration mentioned |
6 |
|
|
In the SEM picture (Figure 4), the described position of “Composite core” and “FRC Post” may be opposite. Please check them. |
Corrected sem picture (Figure 4) was done |
8 |
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Minor comments:
There are many paragraphs in the Introduction section. Several paragraphs should be combined according to their common contents.
The specimen size for micro-TBS should be described.
The word of “shear bond strength” appears at many spots in the manuscript. Please check and change them into “microtensile bond strength”.
Table 3 and Chart 1 are unnecessary because the results of statistical analysis shown in Table 3 can explain by sentence, and Chart 1 exhibits same content with Table 2.
In Figure 2, the illustration of specimen view is improper. Please remake it.
In the SEM picture (Figure 4), the described position of “Composite core” and “FRC Post” may be opposite. Please check them.
Author Response
Reviewer 1:
|
S.No |
Queries |
Comments |
Page no: |
|
1 |
For the Abstract, please add "All test groups were submitted to thermocycling." before " After that, the samples were tested for micro tensile bond strength. A stereomicroscope with a magnification of 20x was used to examine fractured surfaces."
|
All test groups were submitted to thermocycling – the sentence was added in the abstract |
1 |
Reviewer 2:
|
S.No |
Queries |
Comments |
Page no: |
|
|
There are many paragraphs in the Introduction section. Several paragraphs should be combined according to their common contents. |
Paragraph combination done in the introduction |
2 |
|
|
The specimen size for micro-TBS should be described.
|
The specimen dimension of 0.5to 1.0mm thickness was mentioned |
5 |
|
|
The word of “shear bond strength” appears at many spots in the manuscript. Please check and change them into “microtensile bond strength”.
|
Shear bond strength was changes to microtensile bond strength in all the manuscript |
ALL |
|
|
Table 3 and Chart 1 are unnecessary because the results of statistical analysis shown in Table 3 can explain by sentence, and Chart 1 exhibits same content with Table 2.
|
Chart 1 removed |
|
|
|
In Figure 2, the illustration of specimen view is improper. Please remake it.
|
New figure 2 with illustration mentioned |
6 |
|
|
In the SEM picture (Figure 4), the described position of “Composite core” and “FRC Post” may be opposite. Please check them. |
Corrected sem picture (Figure 4) was done |
8 |
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
