Orellana Noé, Ramírez Robert, Roig Miguel, Giner Luís, Mercade Montse, Durán Fernando, Herrera Gerardo
Dental School, Los Andes University, Mérida, Venezuela.
Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2009;22(1):47-56.
The aim of this study was to compare the microtensile bond strength of three different total etch adhesives: XP Bond (Caulk-Dentsply) versus Excite (Ivoclar/Vivadent) and Prime & Bond NT (Caulk-Dentsply). Forty two (42) third human molars were cut to expose the dentinal surface. They were divided into three groups of 14 teeth (GI: XP Bond, G2: Excite, G3: Prime & Bond NT) and two groups of seven teeth for each moisture condition: moist dentin (GM) and dry dentin, (GD). The total-etch technique was used with each moisture variation. The adhesives and composites A3 (Ceram Duo GI, G3 and Tetric Ceram G2) were applied according to manufacturer's instructions. Teeth were cut with an ISOMET 1000 (Buehler Ltd.) to obtain 1 mm2 x 10 mm bars, which were subject to a traction test at 5 mm/min in a universal testing machine (Adamel Lhomargy DY 36). The collected data were recorded and analyzed using an experimental design for studying two factors offixed effrcts with software Statgraphics version 5.1. For the variable type of adhesive, we found p = 0.000, for the variable substrate condition, p = 0.0012, and for interaction between both factors, p = 0.0457, which indicates significant statistical differences. The values for microtensile bond strength were G1M = 55.0642 MPa Standard deviation (SD) 3.09768; G1D 39.115 MPa SD 2.86789; G2M 34.1607 MPa SD 2.86789; G2D = 32.7373 MPa SD 2.77065; G3M 3 7.3407 MPa SD 2.86789 and G3D = 31.0593 MPa SD 2.77065. XP Bond showed the greatest values of micmtensile bond strength under both conditions. Moist substrate increases the values of micmtensile bond stren gth]br the adhesives tested; howeve, Excite shows lower susceptibility to variation of dentinal moisture.
XP Bond(卡沃-登士柏公司)与Excite(义获嘉伟瓦登特公司)以及Prime & Bond NT(卡沃-登士柏公司)。将42颗人类第三磨牙切割以暴露牙本质表面。它们被分为三组,每组14颗牙(第1组:XP Bond,第2组:Excite,第3组:Prime & Bond NT),并且针对每种湿度条件又分为两组,每组7颗牙:湿润牙本质(GM)和干燥牙本质(GD)。对每种湿度变化情况都采用全酸蚀技术。粘结剂和复合树脂A3(第1组和第3组用Ceram Duo,第2组用Tetric Ceram)按照制造商的说明应用。用ISOMET 1000(布勒有限公司)将牙齿切割成1mm²×10mm的棒条,然后在万能试验机(阿达梅尔·洛马尔吉DY 36)中以5mm/min的速度进行拉伸试验。使用Statgraphics 5.1版软件通过研究两个固定效应因素的实验设计对收集到的数据进行记录和分析。对于粘结剂类型这一变量,我们发现p = 0.000,对于底物条件这一变量,p = 0.0012,对于两个因素之间的相互作用,p = 0.0457,这表明存在显著的统计学差异。微拉伸粘结强度的值为:第1组湿润组(G1M)= 55.0642兆帕,标准差(SD)3.097,;第1组干燥组(G1D)= 39.115兆帕,SD 2.86789;第2组湿润组(G2M)= 34.1607兆帕,SD 2. ;第2组干燥组(G2D)= 32.7373兆帕,SD 2.77065;第3组湿润组(G3M)= 37.3407兆帕,SD 2.86789;第3组干燥组(G3D)= 31.0593兆帕,SD 2.77065。在两种条件下,XP Bond均显示出最高的微拉伸粘结强度值。湿润底物会增加所测试粘结剂的微拉伸粘结强度值;然而,Excite对牙本质湿度变化表现出较低的敏感性。