Suppr超能文献

陶瓷(长石质和 IPS Empress II)与实验室复合树脂(Gradia)贴面的比较:它们与牙釉质的抗剪粘结强度比较;一项体外研究。

Ceramic (Feldspathic & IPS Empress II) vs. laboratory composite (Gradia) veneers; a comparison between their shear bond strength to enamel; an in vitro study.

机构信息

Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Medical Sciences/University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Oral Rehabil. 2010 Jul;37(7):569-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02052.x. Epub 2010 Jan 17.

Abstract

Patient demand for aesthetic dentistry is steadily growing. Laminates and free metal restorations have evolved in an attempt to overcome the invasiveness nature of full veneer restorations. Although many different materials have been used for making these restorations, there is no single material that fits best for all purposes. Two groups of ceramic material (Feldspathic and IPS Empress II) and one group of laboratory composite (Gradia) discs (10 discs in each group; 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness) were prepared according to the manufacturer's instruction. The surface of ceramic discs were etched and silanized. In Gradia group, liquid primer was applied on composite surfaces. Thirty freshly extracted sound human molars and premolars were randomly divided into three groups. The enamel surface of each tooth was slightly flattened (0.3 mm) on the buccal or lingual side and then primed and cemented to the prepared discs with the aid of a dental surveyor. The finishing specimens were thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 2500 cycles and then prepared for shear bond strength testing. The resulting data were analyzed by one-way anova and Tukey HSD test. The fractured surfaces of each specimen were inspected by means of stereomicroscope and SEM. There is significant difference between the bond strength of materials tested. The mean bond strengths obtained with Feldspathic ceramic, IPS Empress II and Gradia were 33.10 +/- 4.31 MPa, 26.04 +/- 7.61 MPa and 14.42 +/- 5.82 MPa, respectively. The fracture pattern was mainly mixed for ceramic groups. More scientific evidence needed for standardization of bonding protocols.

摘要

患者对美容牙科的需求正在稳步增长。为了克服全贴面修复的侵袭性,层压体和无金属修复体不断发展。尽管已经使用了许多不同的材料来制作这些修复体,但没有一种材料适合所有用途。根据制造商的说明,准备了两组陶瓷材料(长石质和 IPS Empress II)和一组实验室复合(Gradia)圆盘(每组 10 个;直径 4 毫米,厚度 2 毫米)。陶瓷盘的表面进行了蚀刻和硅烷化处理。在 Gradia 组中,在复合材料表面施加了液体底漆。从 30 颗新鲜拔出的健康人磨牙和前磨牙中随机分为三组。每颗牙齿的牙釉质表面在颊侧或舌侧稍微平坦(0.3 毫米),然后用牙科测量仪将其预涂和粘接到准备好的圆盘上。完成的样本在 5 度 C 和 55 度 C 之间进行热循环 2500 次,然后进行剪切结合强度测试。通过单向方差分析和 Tukey HSD 检验对所得数据进行分析。通过体视显微镜和 SEM 检查每个样本的断裂表面。测试材料的结合强度有显著差异。长石质陶瓷、IPS Empress II 和 Gradia 的平均结合强度分别为 33.10 +/- 4.31 MPa、26.04 +/- 7.61 MPa 和 14.42 +/- 5.82 MPa。陶瓷组的断裂模式主要为混合模式。需要更多的科学证据来规范粘结协议。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验