Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ege University, 35100-Bornova, Izmir, Turkey.
Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Oct;14(5):579-86. doi: 10.1007/s00784-009-0328-7. Epub 2009 Aug 19.
Effect of desensitizers on the bond strength of resin cements to dentin was evaluated. Intact premolars (N = 90) were embedded in polymethyl methacrylate; dentin surfaces were exposed, and they were randomly divided into two main groups of cements (Duolink (D), Variolink II (V); n = 45 per group) and then into three desensitizer subgroups (n = 15 per subgroup). Teeth in controls (C) were treated according to cements' adhesion protocols; the other two groups received either fluoride- [Aqua-Prep F (F)] or triclosan-based [Seal&Protect (T)] desensitizers. Ceramic disks (Empress 2) were adhered; specimens were thermocycled (×5,000 cycles, 5-55 ± 1°C, dwell time 30 s) and subjected to shear bond strength test (MPa ± SD) in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed 1 mm/min). Failure types were classified using scanning electron microscope. For V, application of both desensitizers (29.6 ± 7.8 and 22.8 ± 2.8 for F and T, respectively) did not present significantly different results than that of the VC (21.2 ± 2.3; p > 0.05, one-way ANOVA). In D, F (20.6 ± 2.4) showed significantly higher results (p < 0.05) than those in T (16.1 ± 3.9) and DC group (15.2 ± 2.3). V showed significantly higher results than D (p < 0.05, Bonferroni). F and T did not negatively affect the bond strength results with D and V. Adhesive failures were more frequent with both T (84%) and F (66%) in D; cohesive failures in the cement (88%) were more commonly observed with F in V. Both F and T desensitizers can be safely used prior to final cementation but F in combination with V seems to be more reliable, considering both the bond strength and the failure types.
评估了脱敏剂对树脂水门汀与牙本质粘结强度的影响。将完整的前磨牙(N = 90)嵌入聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯中;暴露牙本质表面,将其随机分为两组主要的水门汀(Duolink(D),Variolink II(V);每组 n = 45),然后再分为三组脱敏剂亚组(每组 n = 15)。对照组(C)的牙齿按照水门汀的粘结程序进行处理;其余两组分别使用氟化物[Aqua-Prep F(F)]或三氯生基[Seal&Protect(T)]脱敏剂处理。将陶瓷片(Empress 2)黏附;在万能试验机上进行热循环(×5000 次,5-55±1°C,停留时间 30 s)并进行剪切粘结强度测试(MPa±SD)。使用扫描电子显微镜对失效类型进行分类。对于 V,两种脱敏剂的应用(F 为 29.6 ± 7.8,T 为 22.8 ± 2.8)与 VC(21.2 ± 2.3)相比没有显著差异(p>0.05,单向方差分析)。在 D 中,F(20.6 ± 2.4)的结果明显高于 T(16.1 ± 3.9)和 DC 组(15.2 ± 2.3)(p<0.05)。V 的结果明显高于 D(p<0.05,Bonferroni)。F 和 T 没有对 D 和 V 的粘结强度结果产生负面影响。在 D 中,T(84%)和 F(66%)更常发生粘结失败;在 V 中,F 更常观察到粘结剂内的内聚性失效(88%)。F 和 T 脱敏剂均可在最终粘固前安全使用,但考虑到粘结强度和失效类型,F 与 V 联合使用似乎更可靠。