Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Adhes Dent. 2010 Oct;12(5):381-92. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a17714.
To test whether or not dentin desensitizing or sealing methods influence the bond strength of universal resin cements.
The bond strength of two universal resin cements (RelyXUnicem, Self-adhesive Prototype Cement) to human dentin was assessed after different dentin surface treatments (test). A conventional resin cement (Panavia 21) served as control. The influence of the following pretreatment methods was tested and compared to freshly ground dentin: dentin desensitizing by means of glutaraldehyde-containing primers (Gluma Desensitizer, Syntac Primer/Adhesive), or dentin sealing by means of bonding agents (Heliobond, ClearfilSE Bond). Additionally, the influence of provisional cement (Freegenol) was analyzed after its application and subsequent mechanical removal. Bond strength after thermocycling was measured in a shear test (n = 10). Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA, followed by a post-hoc Tukey test (p < 0.05).
Both test cements exhibited significantly lower bond strength to freshly ground dentin than the control cement. The desensitization methods did not affect the bond strength of the test cements. Furthermore, the sealing methods significantly increased the bond strength of both test cements as compared to freshly ground dentin. The application and subsequent removal of the provisional cement only had a minor influence on the bond strength of the test cements. The contamination with provisional cement, however, significantly affected the bond strength of the control cement compared to the values achieved on freshly ground dentin.
Desensitization or sealing of dentin have a beneficial effect on the bond strength of universal resin cements. The application of a provisional cement prior to adhesive cementation exhibits no significant influence on the bond strength of the universal resin cements.
测试牙本质脱敏或密封方法是否会影响通用树脂水门汀的粘结强度。
评估两种通用树脂水门汀（RelyXUnicem、自粘接原型水泥）对人牙本质的粘结强度，在不同牙本质表面处理（测试）后进行。传统树脂水泥（Panavia 21）作为对照。测试并比较了以下预处理方法对牙本质的影响：用含戊二醛的底漆（Gluma Desensitizer、Syntac Primer/Adhesive）脱敏，或用粘结剂（Heliobond、ClearfilSE Bond）密封牙本质。此外，还分析了临时粘结剂（Freegenol）应用后及其随后机械去除对粘结强度的影响。热循环后，在剪切试验中测量粘结强度（n = 10）。采用单因素方差分析，随后进行 Tukey 事后检验（p < 0.05）。
两种测试用水泥对新鲜磨出牙本质的粘结强度明显低于对照水泥。脱敏方法对测试用水泥的粘结强度没有影响。此外，与新鲜磨出牙本质相比，密封方法显著提高了两种测试用水泥的粘结强度。临时粘结剂的应用及其随后的去除仅对测试用水泥的粘结强度有轻微影响。然而，临时粘结剂的污染会显著影响对照水泥的粘结强度，与在新鲜磨出牙本质上获得的数值相比。
牙本质脱敏或密封对通用树脂水门汀的粘结强度有有益的影响。在使用粘结性水泥之前应用临时粘结剂对通用树脂水门汀的粘结强度没有显著影响。
