Sanares A M, Itthagarun A, King N M, Tay F R, Pashley D H
Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, 34 Hospital Road, SAR, Hong Kong, China.
Dent Mater. 2001 Nov;17(6):542-56. doi: 10.1016/s0109-5641(01)00016-1.
This study examined the effect of one-bottle adhesives with different acidities on bonding to chemical-cured and light-cured resin composites.
Twenty-four non-carious human third molars were divided into eight groups. A flat dentin surface was created for each tooth. Acid-conditioned dentin surfaces were bonded with Prime&Bond NT (Dentsply), OptiBond SOLO (Kerr), Single Bond (3M) or One-Step (Bisco). Each adhesive group was covered with composite buildups, using either a light-cured (Z100, 3M) or a chemical-cured composite (BisFil 2, Bisco). Specimens were vertically sectioned into 0.9x0.9 mm beams. Microtensile bond strengths were recorded and failure modes were classified using a stereoscopical microscope. Four representative beams from each group were further prepared for SEM examination.
Two-way ANOVA showed that the effect of adhesive types, composite curing modes and their interaction were statistically significant (P<0.001). Multiple comparison tests revealed no statistically significant difference in the bond strength of the four adhesives with the light-cured composite (P>0.05). However, they were significantly lower when used with the chemical-cured composite (P<0.01). A positive correlation was observed between the acidity of adhesives and the bond strengths of the chemical-cured composite. Failure occurred predominantly along the composite-adhesive interface, with microporosities on the adhesive surface and voids within the chemical-cured composite.
Air incorporated during mixing of chemical-cured composites only contributed partially to the decreased bond strength observed in simplified-step adhesives. Ultrastructural observations suggested the presence of a surface interaction between the uncured, acidic resin monomers from the oxygen inhibition layer of the adhesive and the initiator components in the chemical-cured composite.
本研究考察了不同酸度的单瓶装粘接剂与化学固化和光固化树脂复合材料粘接的效果。
将24颗无龋坏的人第三磨牙分为八组。为每颗牙齿制备平坦的牙本质表面。酸蚀处理后的牙本质表面用Prime&Bond NT（登士柏）、OptiBond SOLO（ Kerr）、Single Bond（3M）或One-Step（Bisco）进行粘接。每个粘接剂组分别用光固化复合材料（Z100，3M）或化学固化复合材料（BisFil 2，Bisco）进行复合树脂充填。将样本垂直切成0.9×0.9mm的小梁。记录微拉伸粘接强度，并使用立体显微镜对断裂模式进行分类。每组选取四个代表性小梁进一步制备用于扫描电镜检查。
双向方差分析显示，粘接剂类型、复合材料固化方式及其相互作用的影响具有统计学意义（P<0.001）。多重比较检验显示，四种粘接剂与光固化复合材料的粘接强度无统计学差异（P>0.05）。然而，当与化学固化复合材料一起使用时，它们的粘接强度显著降低（P<0.01）。观察到粘接剂的酸度与化学固化复合材料的粘接强度呈正相关。断裂主要发生在复合材料-粘接剂界面，粘接剂表面有微孔，化学固化复合材料内有空隙。
化学固化复合材料混合过程中混入的空气只是导致简化步骤粘接剂粘接强度降低的部分原因。超微结构观察表明，粘接剂氧抑制层中未固化的酸性树脂单体与化学固化复合材料中的引发剂成分之间存在表面相互作用。
