Papacchini Federica, Goracci Cecilia, Sadek Fernanda Tranchesi, Monticelli Francesca, Garcia-Godoy Franklin, Ferrari Marco
Department of Dental Materials, University of Siena, Policlinico Viale Bracci, Siena 53100, Italy.
J Dent. 2005 Jul;33(6):459-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2004.11.007. Epub 2004 Dec 20.
To measure the microtensile bond strength to ground enamel of different types of materials used as pit and fissure sealants in combination with different substrate conditioners.
From 40 sound extracted molars, eight groups of five teeth were randomly formed. The experimental groups were: (1) (C) 37% phosphoric acid/ClinPro Sealant (3M ESPE); (2) (G) 37% phosphoric acid/Guardian Seal (Kerr); (3) (E/TF) 37% phosphoric acid/Excite/Tetric Flow (Ivoclar-Vivadent) (4) (OS/UF) 37% phosphoric acid/One Step (Bisco)/UniFil Flow (GC); (5) (OS/AE) 37% phosphoric acid/One Step/AEliteflo (Bisco); (6) (UB/UF) UniFil Bond/UniFil Flow (GC); (7) (CC/FVII) GC Cavity Conditioner/Fuji VII (GC); (8) (CC/FII) GC Cavity Conditioner/Fuji II LC Improved (GC). On the buccal of each tooth, a 5mm high build-up was created by incrementally adding layers of the sealing material on the conditioned enamel. By serially cutting the built-up tooth, multiple beam-shaped specimens about 1mm x 1mm in cross section were obtained, and loaded in tensile (0.5 mm/min) until failure occurred.
The bond strengths measured in MPa were: (C) 20.41+/-11.79; (G) 16.02+/-7.99; (E/TF) 24.06+/-9.67; OS/UF 15.63+/-9.00; (OS/AE) 9.31+/-6.05; (UB/UF) 4.96+/-3.46; (CC/FVII) 1.70+/-2.19; (CC/FII) 2.19+/-1.44.
The conventional and the resin-modified glass ionomers measured bond strengths significantly lower than those of any resin-based materials. Failure frequently occurred cohesively within the cement. Flowable composites in combination with phosphoric acid and a total-etch adhesive performed similarly to resin-based materials specifically conceived for sealings, such as ClinPro Sealant and Guardian Seal. The bond achieved by resin composite when treating enamel with the self-etching primer used in this study (UniFil Bond) was significantly lower than that developed when the substrate was etched with 37% phosphoric acid.
测量不同类型的窝沟封闭剂与不同的牙面处理剂联合使用时,对磨除釉质的微拉伸粘结强度。
从40颗完好拔除的磨牙中随机分成八组,每组五颗牙。实验组如下:(1)(C)37%磷酸/ClinPro封闭剂(3M ESPE公司);(2)(G)37%磷酸/Guardian封闭剂(Kerr公司);(3)(E/TF)37%磷酸/Excite/Tetric Flow(义获嘉伟瓦登特公司);(4)(OS/UF)37%磷酸/一步法粘结剂(Bisco公司)/UniFil Flow(GC公司);(5)(OS/AE)37%磷酸/一步法粘结剂/AEliteflo(Bisco公司);(6)(UB/UF)UniFil Bond/UniFil Flow(GC公司);(7)(CC/FVII)GC窝沟处理剂/Fuji VII(GC公司);(8)(CC/FII)GC窝沟处理剂/Fuji II LC改良型(GC公司)。在每颗牙的颊面,通过在处理过的釉质上逐层添加封闭材料形成一个5毫米高的堆积物。通过连续切割堆积好的牙齿,获得多个横截面约为1毫米×1毫米的梁形标本,并以拉伸方式加载(0.5毫米/分钟)直至发生断裂。
以兆帕为单位测量的粘结强度如下:(C)20.41±11.79;(G)16.02±7.99;(E/TF)24.06±9.67;OS/UF 15.63±9.00;(OS/AE)9.31±6.05;(UB/UF)4.96±3.46;(CC/FVII)1.70±2.19;(CC/FII)2.19±1.44。
传统的和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀测量的粘结强度明显低于任何树脂基材料。断裂常发生在粘结剂内部。可流动复合树脂与磷酸和全酸蚀粘结剂联合使用时,其性能与专门用于窝沟封闭的树脂基材料(如ClinPro封闭剂和Guardian封闭剂)相似。在本研究中,用自酸蚀底漆(UniFil Bond)处理釉质时树脂复合材料获得的粘结强度明显低于用37%磷酸酸蚀牙面时的粘结强度。