Department of General Dentistry, Creighton University School of Dentistry, 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, NE 68178, USA.
Dent Mater. 2009 Dec;25(12):1527-31. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.07.005. Epub 2009 Aug 12.
Shear fatigue limit (SFL) testing, coupled with shear bond strength (SBS) measurements can provide valuable information regarding the ability of adhesive systems to bond to mineralized tooth structures. The clinical technique for enamel bonding with adhesive resins has shifted from bonding to a thoroughly dried acid conditioned surface to a moist surface to facilitate dentin bonding. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of ethanol-containing etch-and-rinse adhesive (ERA) systems on moist and dry enamel by determining the resin composite to enamel SBS and SFL, and examining the relationship of SBS and SFL.
Twelve specimens each were used to determine 24-h resin composite (Z100 - 3M ESPE) to enamel SBS to moist and dry surfaces with two ERA systems, Adper Single Bond Plus (SBP) and OptiBond Solo Plus (OBP). A staircase method of fatigue testing was used in a four-station fatigue cycler to determine the SFL of resin composite to enamel bonds (moist and dry) with the two ERA systems (20 specimens for each test condition) at 0.25Hz for 40,000 cycles. ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test were used for the SBS data and a modified t-test with Bonferroni correction was used for comparisons of SFL.
The two ERA systems each generated statistically similar SBS (p>0.05) to moist and dry enamel and the SBS of SBP was significantly higher than OBP on dry enamel (p<0.05). The SFL of SBP was significantly greater to dry enamel when compared to moist enamel and there was not a significant difference in the SFL of OBP on dry and moist enamel. There were no significant differences in SFL values between SBP on either moist or dry enamel and OBP on both moist and dry enamel.
Fatigue testing may provide more useful information than SBS tests regarding the performance of dental adhesive systems. The chemical composition, solvents and filler components of ERA systems may influence their ability to develop long-term durable bonds to both moist and dry enamel surfaces.
剪切疲劳极限（SFL）测试与剪切结合强度（SBS）测量相结合，可以为黏结系统与矿化牙体结构结合的能力提供有价值的信息。黏结树脂对牙釉质的临床技术已经从黏结到彻底干燥的酸处理表面转变为湿表面，以促进牙本质黏结。本研究的目的是通过测定树脂复合材料与牙釉质的 SBS 和 SFL，比较含乙醇的酸蚀-冲洗黏结（ERA）系统在湿和干牙釉质上的性能，并研究 SBS 和 SFL 的关系。
用两种 ERA 系统，AdperSingleBondPlus（SBP）和 OptiBondSoloPlus（OBP），各制备 12 个样本，以确定 24h 树脂复合材料（Z100-3MESPE）与湿、干牙釉质的 SBS。疲劳测试采用四工位疲劳循环器中的台阶法，以 0.25Hz 进行 40000 次循环，对两种 ERA 系统（各 20 个试件）的牙釉质黏合的 SFL（湿、干）进行疲劳测试。SBS 数据采用方差分析和 Tukey 事后检验，SFL 比较采用修正 t 检验和 Bonferroni 校正。
两种 ERA 系统与湿、干牙釉质的 SBS 均具有统计学上的相似性（p>0.05），SBP 的 SBS 显著高于干燥牙釉质上的 OBP（p<0.05）。SBP 的 SFL 对干燥牙釉质明显大于湿润牙釉质，而 OBP 在干燥和湿润牙釉质上的 SFL 无显著差异。SBP 在湿润和干燥牙釉质上的 SFL 值与 OBP 在湿润和干燥牙釉质上的 SFL 值无显著差异。
疲劳测试可能比 SBS 测试提供更有用的信息，了解牙科黏结系统的性能。ERA 系统的化学成分、溶剂和填料成分可能会影响其在湿、干牙釉质表面形成长期持久黏合的能力。
