Gray G B, Carey G P D, Jagger D C
Division of Restorative Dentistry, Bristol Dental School, Lower Maudlin Street, Bristol BS1 2LY, UK.
J Prosthodont. 2006 Jan-Feb;15(1):2-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00062.x.
The purposes of the study were to measure the tensile bond strength of composite resin to human enamel specimens that had been either etched or air-abraded, and to compare the quality of the marginal seal, through the assessment of microleakage, of composite resin to human enamel specimens that had been either etched or air-abraded.
Thirty mandibular molar teeth were decoronated and sectioned mesio-distally to produce six groups, each containing ten specimens that were embedded in acrylic resin using a jig. In each of the four treatment groups, the specimen surfaces were treated by either abrasion with 27 or 50 microm alumina at 4 mm or 20 mm distance, and a composite resin was bonded to the treated surfaces in a standardized manner. In the two control groups the specimens were treated with 15 seconds exposure to 36% phosphoric acid gel and then similarly treated before being stored in sterile water for 1 week. All specimens were then subjected to tensile bond strength testing at either 1 or 5 mm/min crosshead speed. For the microleakage study, the degree of dye penetration was measured 32 times for each treatment group, using a neutral methylene blue dye at the interface between composite and either 27 or 50 microm air-abraded tooth structure or etched enamel surfaces.
The mean bond strength values recorded for Group 1 (phosphoric acid etch, 5 mm/min crosshead speed) was 25.4 MPa; Group 2 (phosphoric acid etch, 1 mm/min), 22.2 MPa; Group 3 (27 microm alumina at 4 mm distance), 16.8 MPa; Group 4 (50 microm alumina at 4 mm distance), 16.9 MPa; Group 5 (27 microm alumina at 20 mm distance), 4.2 MPa; and for Group 6 (50 microm alumina at 20 mm distance) 3.4 MPa. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated significant differences among the groups, and a multiple comparison test (Tukey) demonstrated that conventionally etched specimens had a greater bond strength than air-abraded specimen groups. No significant difference in dye penetration could be demonstrated among the groups (p= 0.58).
Composite resin applied to enamel surfaces prepared using an acid etch procedure exhibited higher bond strengths than those prepared with air abrasion technology. The abrasion particle size did not affect the bond strength produced, but the latter was adversely affected by the distance of the air abrasion nozzle from the enamel surface. The crosshead speed of the bond testing apparatus had no effect on the bond strengths recorded. The marginal seal of composite to prepared enamel was unaffected by the method of enamel preparation.
本研究的目的是测量复合树脂与经过酸蚀或空气喷砂处理的人牙釉质标本的拉伸粘结强度，并通过评估微渗漏来比较复合树脂与经过酸蚀或空气喷砂处理的人牙釉质标本的边缘封闭质量。
将30颗下颌磨牙去冠并近远中向切片，制成六组，每组包含10个标本，使用夹具将其嵌入丙烯酸树脂中。在四个处理组中的每一组中，标本表面分别用27或50微米的氧化铝在4毫米或20毫米的距离进行喷砂处理，然后以标准化方式将复合树脂粘结到处理过的表面上。在两个对照组中，标本用36%磷酸凝胶处理15秒，然后进行类似处理，之后在无菌水中保存1周。然后所有标本在1或5毫米/分钟的十字头速度下进行拉伸粘结强度测试。对于微渗漏研究，在复合树脂与27或50微米空气喷砂处理的牙体结构或酸蚀釉质表面之间的界面处，使用中性亚甲基蓝染料对每个处理组的染料渗透程度进行32次测量。
第1组（磷酸酸蚀，十字头速度5毫米/分钟）记录的平均粘结强度值为25.4兆帕；第2组（磷酸酸蚀，1毫米/分钟），22.2兆帕；第3组（4毫米距离用27微米氧化铝），16.8兆帕；第4组（4毫米距离用50微米氧化铝），16.9兆帕；第5组（20毫米距离用27微米氧化铝），4.2兆帕；第6组（20毫米距离用50微米氧化铝），3.4兆帕。方差分析（ANOVA）表明各组之间存在显著差异，多重比较检验（Tukey）表明传统酸蚀的标本比空气喷砂处理的标本组具有更高的粘结强度。各组之间在染料渗透方面未显示出显著差异（p = 0.58）。
应用于采用酸蚀程序制备的釉质表面的复合树脂表现出比采用空气喷砂技术制备的更高的粘结强度。磨料颗粒大小不影响所产生的粘结强度，但后者受到空气喷砂喷嘴与釉质表面距离的不利影响。粘结测试设备的十字头速度对记录的粘结强度没有影响。复合树脂与制备好的釉质的边缘封闭不受釉质制备方法的影响。
