新型自粘结黏固剂与传统多步骤系统的微拉伸黏结强度。

Microtensile bond strength of new self-adhesive luting agents and conventional multistep systems.

机构信息

Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Guarulhos, Guarulhos, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2009 Nov;102(5):306-12. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60180-3.

DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60180-3

PMID:19853172

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Several self-adhesive luting agents have recently been introduced on the market. It is crucial to know the effectiveness of such luting agents prior to their clinical application.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strengths (microTBS) produced by different self-adhesive cements and compare them with conventional luting agents.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six self-adhesive cements (RelyX Unicem (UN), RelyX U100 (UC), SmartCem 2 (SC), G-Cem (GC), Maxcem (MC), and SeT (SET), and 2 conventional luting agents, one that uses a 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (RelyX ARC (RX)), and one that uses a 1-step self-etching adhesive (Panavia F (PF)), were used in this study. An additional group included the use of a 2-step self-etching primer adhesive system (Clearfil SE Bond) prior to the application of Panavia F (PS). Fifty-four human molars were abraded to expose occlusal surfaces and were assigned to 9 groups according to the luting material (n=6). Five composite resin (Filtek Z250) discs (12 mm in diameter, 5 mm thick) were cemented on the teeth according to manufacturers' instructions. After 24 hours of water storage, restored teeth were serially sectioned into beams with a cross-sectional area of approximately 1 mm2 at the bonded interface and were tested in tension with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Failure mode was determined using scanning electron microscopy. Data were statistically analyzed by 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's studentized range HSD test (alpha =.05).

RESULTS

Mean bond strengths (SD) in MPa were: RX, 69.6 (16.6)A; PS, 49.2 (9.7)A; PF, 33.7 (13.9)AB; GC, 16.9 (10.3)BC; UC, 15.3 (3.4)BC; UN, 12.5 (2.4)C; MC 11.5 (6.8)CD; SC, 8.5 (4.9)CD; SET, 4.6 (0.5)D. Groups with different uppercase letters were significantly different from each other (P<.05). The predominant failure mode of the self-adhesive cements was adhesive between the resin cement and dentin.

CONCLUSIONS

The bond strengths produced by the multistep luting agents were significantly higher than those observed for most self-adhesive cements.

摘要

问题陈述

最近市场上推出了几种自粘水门汀。在将其临床应用之前，了解此类水门汀的有效性至关重要。

目的

本研究的目的是评估不同自粘水门汀的微拉伸粘结强度（microTBS），并将其与传统水门汀进行比较。

材料和方法

本研究使用了 6 种自粘水门汀（RelyX Unicem（UN）、RelyX U100（UC）、SmartCem 2（SC）、G-Cem（GC）、Maxcem（MC）和 SeT（SET））和 2 种传统水门汀，一种使用两步酸蚀冲洗型粘结剂（RelyX ARC（RX）），另一种使用一步自酸蚀粘结剂（Panavia F（PF））。另有一组在使用 Panavia F 前先用两步自酸蚀底胶（Clearfil SE Bond）处理。将 54 颗人磨牙研磨以暴露咬合面，并根据水门汀材料将其分为 9 组（n=6）。按照制造商的说明，将 5 个复合树脂（Filtek Z250）圆盘（直径 12mm，厚 5mm）粘结在牙齿上。水储存 24 小时后，将修复后的牙齿沿粘结界面以约 1mm2 的横截面面积连续切成梁，并以 1mm/min 的十字头速度进行拉伸测试。使用扫描电子显微镜确定失效模式。数据采用单因素方差分析和 Tukey 学生化范围 HSD 检验（α=.05）进行统计学分析。

结果

以 MPa 为单位的平均粘结强度（SD）为：RX，69.6（16.6）A；PS，49.2（9.7）A；PF，33.7（13.9）AB；GC，16.9（10.3）BC；UC，15.3（3.4）BC；UN，12.5（2.4）C；MC，11.5（6.8）CD；SC，8.5（4.9）CD；SET，4.6（0.5）D。具有不同大写字母的组之间差异有统计学意义（P<.05）。自粘水门汀的主要失效模式是树脂水门汀和牙本质之间的粘结。