Swift E J, Perdigão J, Wilder A D, Heymann H O, Sturdevant J R, Bayne S C
Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB 7450, 302 Brauer, Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599-7450, USA.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2001 Aug;132(8):1117-23. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2001.0337.
The method currently used to adhere resin to dentin involves etching, priming and bonding. Many commercial adhesives now combine priming and bonding functions in a single solution, and these are frequently called one-bottle adhesives. The purpose of this study was to compare the 36-month clinical performance of two commercial one-bottle adhesives.
The authors enrolled 33 patients with noncarious cervical lesions in the study. A total of 101 lesions were restored with either a filled, ethanol-based adhesive (OptiBond Solo, SDS Kerr) or an unfilled, acetone-based adhesive (Prime & Bond 2.1, Dentsply Caulk) and a hybrid resin-based composite. Enamel margins were not beveled, and no mechanical retention was placed. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and six months, 18 months and 36 months after placement using modified Cvar/Ryge criteria.
The retention rates at 36 months were 93.3 percent for the ethanol-based adhesive and 89.4 percent for the acetone-based adhesive. The difference in retention rates was not statistically significant. In both groups, 12 percent of the retained restorations had marginal staining, but no recurrent caries was detected around any restoration. Other restoration characteristics such as marginal adaptation and color match remained excellent three years after placement.
The performance of both adhesives was excellent during this 36-month clinical trial. At the most recent recall evaluation (that is, 36 months), the filled, ethanol-based adhesive exhibited slightly better bond durability, but the difference between the two materials was not statistically significant.
The one-bottle adhesives evaluated in this study provided excellent clinical retention of Class V restorations without mechanical retention. When the materials are used properly, restorations are retained at a high rate during at least three years of clinical service.
目前用于使树脂黏附于牙本质的方法包括酸蚀、涂底漆和黏结。现在许多商用黏合剂在单一溶液中结合了涂底漆和黏结功能，这些通常被称为单瓶黏合剂。本研究的目的是比较两种商用单瓶黏合剂36个月的临床性能。
作者招募了33例患有非龋性颈部病变的患者参与研究。总共101处病变用一种填充的、基于乙醇的黏合剂（OptiBond Solo，SDS Kerr公司）或一种未填充的、基于丙酮的黏合剂（Prime & Bond 2.1，登士柏卡沃公司）以及一种混合树脂基复合材料进行修复。釉质边缘未做斜面处理，也未设置机械固位。使用改良的Cvar/Ryge标准在基线以及修复体放置后6个月、18个月和36个月时对修复体进行评估。
基于乙醇的黏合剂在36个月时的保留率为93.3%，基于丙酮的黏合剂为89.4%。保留率的差异无统计学意义。在两组中，12%的保留修复体有边缘染色，但在任何修复体周围均未检测到继发龋。其他修复特征，如边缘适应性和颜色匹配在放置三年后仍保持良好。
在这项36个月的临床试验中，两种黏合剂的性能均良好。在最近的回访评估（即36个月时），填充的、基于乙醇的黏合剂表现出稍好的黏结耐久性，但两种材料之间的差异无统计学意义。
本研究中评估的单瓶黏合剂在没有机械固位的情况下为V类修复体提供了优异的临床保留率。当材料正确使用时，修复体在至少三年的临床使用期间以较高的比率得以保留。
