Tulunoglu O, Uçtaşh M, Alaçam A, Omürlü H
Department of Pedodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Gazi, 15 Sokak 41/1 Bahçelievler 06490 Ankara, Turkey.
Oper Dent. 2000 Jul-Aug;25(4):292-8.
This in vitro study evaluated the effect of dentin bonding agents in reducing microleakage after three months in Class V restorations restored with Z100 resin composite. Materials tested were three types of resin-based dentin bonding agents: a multi-step (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose); a one-step (Scotchbond One-Step); a self-etching, self-priming (Clearfil Liner Bond) and a resin-modified glass ionomer (GC Fuji Bond LC). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in cementum were prepared both on labial and lingual surfaces of extracted premolar teeth. Restorations (two per tooth) were distributed randomly into nine test groups (n = 10) consisting of the various DBAs applied with co-cure and pre-cure techniques, and no dentin bonding as a negative control group. Samples were stored in saline for three months, thermocycled, stained with silver nitrate, then sectioned through the middle of the preparation to facilitate the removal of the composite resin restoration. For groups treated with the pre-cure technique, the differences between the enamel leakage values of SBMP-control, CFLB-control and SB1S-control subgroups were significant (p < 0.05). For enamel leakage values of groups treated with the co-cure technique, the differences between the SBMP-control, SB1S-control, CFLB-control and Fuji LC-control subgroups were significant (p < 0.05). For cementum leakage values of groups treated with pre-cure technique, the difference between the CFLB-control and the Fuji, SBMP and SB1S groups was significant (p < 0.05). No significant differences could be detected between the cementum leakage values of groups treated with the co-cure technique (p > 0.05). The differences between the values obtained with application of CFLB with the pre-cure and co-cure techniques at the cementum margins were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.02). No statistically significant differences could be detected between the pre-cure and co-cure values of the other test materials. Generally for every group, cementum microleakage values were greater than enamel microleakage values (p < 0.05). The use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, Scotchbond One-Step and Fuji Bond LC with the co-cure technique to decrease the application time did not cause any significant increase in microleakage. Only pre-curing using Clearfil Liner Bond provided better microleakage properties than the other pre-cured adhesives.
这项体外研究评估了牙本质粘结剂对用Z100树脂复合材料修复的V类洞修复体三个月后微渗漏的影响。测试的材料为三种树脂基牙本质粘结剂:一种多步骤型(Scotchbond多功能粘结剂);一种单步骤型(Scotchbond单步骤粘结剂);一种自酸蚀、自底漆型(Clearfil Liner Bond)和一种树脂改性玻璃离子体(GC Fuji Bond LC)。在拔除的前磨牙的唇面和舌面制备V类洞,其咬合边缘位于釉质,牙龈边缘位于牙骨质。修复体(每颗牙两个)随机分为九个测试组(n = 10),包括采用共固化和预固化技术应用的各种牙本质粘结剂,以及不使用牙本质粘结作为阴性对照组。样本在盐水中保存三个月,进行热循环处理,用硝酸银染色,然后沿制备物中部切片以便于去除复合树脂修复体。对于采用预固化技术处理的组,SBMP对照组、CFLB对照组和SB1S对照组的釉质渗漏值之间存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。对于采用共固化技术处理的组的釉质渗漏值,SBMP对照组、SB1S对照组、CFLB对照组和Fuji LC对照组之间存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。对于采用预固化技术处理的组的牙骨质渗漏值,CFLB对照组与Fuji、SBMP和SB1S组之间存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。对于采用共固化技术处理的组的牙骨质渗漏值,未检测到显著差异(p > 0.05)。发现在牙骨质边缘采用预固化和共固化技术应用CFLB所获得的值之间存在统计学显著差异(p = 0.02)。对于其他测试材料的预固化和共固化值,未检测到统计学显著差异。一般来说,对于每个组,牙骨质微渗漏值大于釉质微渗漏值(p < 0.05)。采用共固化技术使用Scotchbond多功能粘结剂、Scotchbond单步骤粘结剂和Fuji Bond LC以减少应用时间并未导致微渗漏有任何显著增加。仅使用Clearfil Liner Bond进行预固化比其他预固化粘合剂具有更好的微渗漏性能。