Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E
Department of Dental Materials, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eur J Oral Sci. 1999 Feb;107(1):65-9. doi: 10.1046/j.0909-8836.1999.eos107110.x.
Zinc oxide-eugenol (ZOE) cements are widely used as temporary filling materials. However, eugenol has earlier been shown to have a detrimental effect on both resin composites and dentin-bonding systems. The aim of the present in vitro study was to examine whether ZOE cement would also reduce the efficacy of relatively new dentin-bonding systems. This was done by determination of gap formation around resin composite fillings in dentin cavities and of bond strength of resin composite to enamel and dentin. The tooth surfaces involved were either freshly cut, or had been exposed to a ZOE cement (IRM) or to a non-ZOE cement (Cavit) for 7 d before application of a dentin-bonding system (Gluma CPS or Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus) and a resin composite (Z100). Gap formation was assessed in a light microscope on 20-min-old fillings and expressed as wall-to-wall contraction (the width of the maximum marginal gap in % of the cavity diameter). Bond strength was measured in shear on 1-d-old specimens. The mean values of wall-to-wall contraction were 0.06-0.09% with Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus and 0.20-0.24% with Gluma CPS. The mean values of bond strength to enamel were 22-25 MPa for Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus and 20-23 MPa for Gluma CPS, and to dentin were 20-22 MPa for Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus and 13-14 MPa for Gluma CPS. The use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus resulted in higher bond strength to dentin and less wall-to-wall contraction than did Gluma CPS. No differences were found in either wall-to-wall contraction or in bond strength between the three groups for either dentin-bonding system. Thus, the ZOE cement did not influence the efficacy of two relatively new dentin-bonding systems.
氧化锌丁香酚（ZOE）水门汀被广泛用作临时充填材料。然而，先前已表明丁香酚对树脂复合材料和牙本质粘结系统均有不利影响。本体外研究的目的是检验ZOE水门汀是否也会降低相对新型牙本质粘结系统的效能。这是通过测定牙本质窝洞树脂复合材料充填物周围的间隙形成情况以及树脂复合材料与釉质和牙本质的粘结强度来实现的。所涉及的牙齿表面要么是 freshly cut，要么在应用牙本质粘结系统（Gluma CPS或Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus）和树脂复合材料（Z100）之前，已暴露于ZOE水门汀（IRM）或非ZOE水门汀（Cavit）7天。在光学显微镜下对20分钟龄的充填物评估间隙形成情况，并表示为壁对壁收缩（最大边缘间隙宽度占窝洞直径的百分比）。在1天龄的标本上测量剪切粘结强度。使用Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus时壁对壁收缩的平均值为0.06 - 0.09%，使用Gluma CPS时为0.20 - 0.24%。Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus对釉质的粘结强度平均值为22 - 25 MPa，Gluma CPS为20 - 23 MPa；对牙本质的粘结强度，Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus为20 - 22 MPa，Gluma CPS为13 - 14 MPa。与Gluma CPS相比，使用Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus对牙本质的粘结强度更高，壁对壁收缩更小。对于两种牙本质粘结系统中的任何一种，三组在壁对壁收缩或粘结强度方面均未发现差异。因此，ZOE水门汀不会影响两种相对新型牙本质粘结系统的效能。
