Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite Restorations: Direct vs. Indirect Techniques Using Cohesive Zone Models

The purpose of this in silico study was to evaluate the main difference of the adhesion strength of direct and semi-direct composite resin restorations in dentin using micro-tensile testing (μTBS) and finite element analysis (FEA). This in silico study employed cohesive zone traction and shear laws to investigate interfacial damage in both restoration groups. Tridimensional finite element models of both restoration specimens were created. A 20 μm thick resin cement layer was created for the semi-direct case. The Clearfil SE Bond 2 adhesive system and the restorative material, Ceram X Spectra ST HV composite resin, were used on both restorations. The numerical bond strength of both restoration techniques was evaluated using two different analysis assumptions. In the first assumption, the numerical analysis procedure included only the non-linear behavior of dentin and the von Mises damage criterion, whereas cohesive zone models were included in the second analysis assumption. The influence of dentin-adhesive cohesive mechanical properties was studied using values reported in the literature, and a sensitivity study helped improve the correlation between experimental and numerical results. The mechanical properties of the composite cohesive zone were defined assuming that the interface strength of dentin and composite follows the values reported by the manufacturer of Spectra ST. Damage initiation and progression were analyzed, and strains and stresses of the cohesive zone models (CZM) were compared with the corresponding perfect bonded models. The experimental µTBS results for the direct restoration strategy showed an adhesive strength of 38.156 ± 10.750 MPa, while the CZM predicted a slightly higher value of 40.4 ± 10.8 MPa. For the indirect restoration strategy, the experimental adhesive strength was 25.449 ± 10.193 MPa, compared to a numerically predicted strength of 28.1 ± 9.3 MPa. Overall, the CZM tends to overestimate the adhesive strength relative to experimental values. The statistical analysis of dentin extension strains for direct (DR) and semi-direct (SR) group models reveals that the SR configuration yields higher strain levels. Hence, these results suggest that, assuming identical dentin properties across both restoration groups, the material configuration in the direct restoration offers better mechanical protection to the dentin. These findings highlight the critical role of incorporating damage mechanics to more accurately characterize stress distribution during tooth rehabilitation.