Gallo John R, Burgess John O, Ripps Alan H, Walker Richard S, Ireland Edward J, Mercante Donald E, Davidson Jessica M
Dept of Operative Dentistry and Biomaterials, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, School of Dentistry, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Oper Dent. 2005 May-Jun;30(3):275-81.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the placement of two restorative materials, including a compomer (F2000, 3M ESPE) and a resin composite (Silux Plus, 3M ESPE), in non-carious cervical lesions using a self-etching bonding agent (F2000 self-etching primer/adhesive) and a fifth generation bonding agent (Single Bond, 3M ESPE) and to evaluate and compare these restorations for marginal discoloration, secondary caries, anatomical form, retention, surface texture and marginal adaptation at baseline and annually for three years. F2000 and Silux Plus were used to restore the teeth with moderate-sized non-carious cervical lesions. F2000 was placed using two different bonding agents: F2000 self-etching primer/adhesive (F2000SE group) and Single Bond (F2000SB group); Silux Plus was placed as a control using Single Bond (SiluxSB group). Thirty restorations of each material/dentin adhesive combination were placed. All restorations were evaluated at baseline and annually for three years using a modified USPHS scale. At the end of the three-year recall, Silux Plus had significantly better surface texture than F2000 (p < 0.0001). In addition, marginal adaptation significantly worsened over time starting at one year, as compared with baseline, for all groups (p < 0.0001). When anatomic form was compared between F2000 and Silux Plus, the p-value was 0.085, demonstrating that F2000 was slightly better than Silux Plus. Likewise, when comparing marginal adaptation between the F2000SE and SiluxSB groups, the p-value was 0.064, demonstrating that F2000 with the self-etching primer had better margins than Silux Plus with Single Bond. No other differences were found among the groups.
本研究的目的是使用自酸蚀粘结剂（F2000自酸蚀底漆/粘结剂）和第五代粘结剂（Single Bond，3M ESPE），评估两种修复材料（一种复合体[F2000，3M ESPE]和一种树脂复合体[Silux Plus，3M ESPE]）在非龋性颈部病变中的放置情况，并在基线时以及之后三年每年评估和比较这些修复体的边缘变色、继发龋、解剖形态、固位、表面质地和边缘适应性。F2000和Silux Plus用于修复有中等大小非龋性颈部病变的牙齿。F2000使用两种不同的粘结剂放置：F2000自酸蚀底漆/粘结剂（F2000SE组）和Single Bond（F2000SB组）；Silux Plus作为对照使用Single Bond放置（SiluxSB组）。每种材料/牙本质粘结剂组合放置30个修复体。使用改良的美国公共卫生署（USPHS）标准在基线时以及之后三年每年对所有修复体进行评估。在三年随访结束时，Silux Plus的表面质地明显优于F2000（p < 0.0001）。此外，与基线相比，所有组从一年开始边缘适应性随时间显著变差（p < 0.0001）。当比较F2000和Silux Plus之间的解剖形态时，p值为0.085，表明F2000略优于Silux Plus。同样，当比较F2000SE组和SiluxSB组之间的边缘适应性时，p值为0.064，表明使用自酸蚀底漆的F2000边缘比使用Single Bond的Silux Plus更好。各组之间未发现其他差异。
