Fruits Terry J, Knapp Jason A, Khajotia Sharukh S
Department of Operative Dentistry, University of Oklahoma College of Dentistry, Oklahoma City, OK 73117, USA.
Oper Dent. 2006 Nov-Dec;31(6):719-27. doi: 10.2341/05-148.
This study compared the degree of microleakage in the proximal walls of direct and indirect resin slot restorations in relation to the types of dentin bonding systems and the location of gingival margins. Two Class II slot preparations were prepared and restored in each of 60 extracted human molars using direct (Filtek Supreme) and indirect (Tescera ATL) restorative resin materials. Various types of dentin bonding systems, including self-etching (OneStep Plus/Tyrian SPE, iBond, Xeno III) and etch and rinse systems (All-Bond 2, Prime & Bond NT) were used to restore the prepared teeth. The gingival proximal wall was placed apical to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) in 1 proximal box and coronal to the CEJ in the other. The specimens were stained and evaluated for microleakage using a digital imaging and analysis system. Significant differences were found in the degree of microleakage observed in the various restorative groups. In general, the group restored with indirect resin had less microleakage than the direct resin groups. Factors, such as type of dentin bonding system and location of gingival margins, exert a substantial influence on the degree of microleakage that occurred along the walls of proximal resin restorations.
本研究比较了直接和间接树脂槽修复体近中壁的微渗漏程度,涉及牙本质粘结系统类型和龈缘位置。在60颗拔除的人磨牙上,分别使用直接修复树脂材料(Filtek Supreme)和间接修复树脂材料(Tescera ATL)制备并修复两个II类槽洞。使用各种类型的牙本质粘结系统,包括自酸蚀系统(OneStep Plus/Tyrian SPE、iBond、Xeno III)和酸蚀冲洗系统(All-Bond 2、Prime & Bond NT)来修复制备好的牙齿。一个近中盒的龈方近中壁位于牙骨质釉质界(CEJ)根尖方,另一个近中盒的龈方近中壁位于CEJ冠方。对标本进行染色,并使用数字成像和分析系统评估微渗漏情况。在不同修复组中观察到的微渗漏程度存在显著差异。总体而言,间接树脂修复组的微渗漏比直接树脂修复组少。牙本质粘结系统类型和龈缘位置等因素对近中树脂修复体壁上发生的微渗漏程度有重大影响。