Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Lasers Med Sci. 2010 Jul;25(4):493-502. doi: 10.1007/s10103-009-0672-5. Epub 2009 Apr 27.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the microleakage of all-in-one self-etch adhesives and their respective nanocomposites in class V cavities prepared by erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser and bur. Class V cavities were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 72 premolars by Er:YAG laser or bur and divided into six groups (n = 24). The occlusal margins were enamel and the cervical margins were cementum. The groups were as follows: group 1 Er:YAG laser preparation (E) + Xeno V (X) + CeramX (C); group 2 bur preparation (B) + X + C; group 3 E + AdheSE One (A) + Tetric EvoCeram (T); group 4 B + A + T; group 5 E + Clearfil S3 Bond (CSB) + Clearfil Majesty Esthetic (CME); group 6 B + CSB + CME. All teeth were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 h, then thermocycled 500 times (5-55 degrees C). Ten teeth from each group were chosen for the microleakage investigation and two teeth for the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluation. The teeth that were prepared for the microleakage test were immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 h. After immersion, the teeth were sectioned and observed under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (P < 0.05). Bur-prepared cavities presented less microleakage in all groups for enamel (P < 0.05); however, in cervical margins, there were no differences between laser-prepared and bur-prepared cavities in the Xeno V + CeramX and AdheSE One + Tetric EvoCeram groups (P > 0.05). SEM observations of restorative material-dentin interfaces seemed to correspond with those of the microleakage test. Microleakage at the cervical interfaces was greater than that at the occlusal interfaces. Er:YAG laser-prepared class V cavities yielded more microleakage in occlusal margins with all-in-one self-etch adhesives and the respective manufacturer's nanocomposites.
本研究旨在评估全酸蚀自粘接剂及其相应纳米复合材料在 Er:YAG 激光和车针对制备的 V 类洞中的微渗漏。通过 Er:YAG 激光或车针在 72 颗前磨牙的颊面和舌面制备 V 类洞，将其分为 6 组（n = 24）。咬合边缘为釉质，颈缘为牙骨质。各组如下：第 1 组为 Er:YAG 激光制备（E）+ Xeno V（X）+ CeramX（C）；第 2 组为车针制备（B）+ X+C；第 3 组为 E+AdheSE One（A）+ Tetric EvoCeram（T）；第 4 组为 B+A+T；第 5 组为 E+Clearfil S3 Bond（CSB）+ Clearfil Majesty Esthetic（CME）；第 6 组为 B+CSB+CME。所有牙齿均在 37°C 的蒸馏水中保存 24 h，然后热循环 500 次（5-55°C）。每组取 10 颗牙齿进行微渗漏研究，2 颗牙齿进行扫描电镜（SEM）评估。用于微渗漏测试的牙齿用 0.5%碱性品红染料浸泡 24 h。浸泡后，将牙齿切成薄片，在立体显微镜下观察染料渗透情况。采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Mann-Whitney U 检验进行数据分析（P<0.05）。在所有 Xeno V+ CeramX 和 AdheSE One+ Tetric EvoCeram 组中，车针制备的窝洞在釉质处的微渗漏均少于激光制备的窝洞（P<0.05）；然而，在颈缘处，激光制备窝洞与车针制备窝洞之间无差异（P>0.05）。修复材料-牙本质界面的 SEM 观察结果似乎与微渗漏试验结果一致。颈缘处的微渗漏大于咬合缘处的微渗漏。使用全酸蚀自粘接剂及其相应制造商的纳米复合材料，Er:YAG 激光制备的 V 类洞在咬合边缘处产生更多的微渗漏。
