Department of Dental Clinical Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Oper Dent. 2010 Jan-Feb;35(1):84-93. doi: 10.2341/09-075-L.
Self-etch bonding systems are easy to use and popular in dental practice. The current study examined the in vitro shear bond strengths to dentin and ground enamel of four self-etch bonding systems and a two-step etch-and-rinse bonding system. Two hundred extracted non-carious human molars were used. Approximately 0.5 mm of enamel was removed from the buccal surface of 100 teeth and the bond strengths of this enamel surface were determined. The buccal surface of the remaining 100 teeth was ground away to create a standardized smear layer on dentin. Five adhesive systems were used: Adper Single Bond Plus (ASB): two-step etch-and-rinse); Adper Scotchbond SE (AS), Clearfil SE Bond (CSE-both two-step self-etch); XENO V (X) and Adper Easy Bond (AE): both one-step self-etch). Filtek Z250 composite was bonded to the tooth using each adhesive system in a low configuration (C) factor (0.2) and a high C-factor (4.4) mold (10 teeth in each group). The specimens were thermal cycled 2,000x, then subjected to a shear bond strength test. The data were compared with analysis of variance using the Fisher's PLSD multiple comparison tests. A three-factor ANOVA showed that, overall, the shear bond strength was significantly higher in the low C-factor group 4.33 MPa (p < 0.0001). There was also a significant difference in the shear bond strengths among the bonding systems (p < 0.0001). The higher C-factor molds had the same adverse effect on all bonding systems and on both enamel and dentin, but the bonding systems acted differently on enamel and dentin (three-factor ANOVA p < 0.0001). The two-step etch-and-rinse system (ASB) consistently delivered the highest bond strengths (34.6-41.5 MPa). Fisher's PLSD comparisons showed that, in the high C-factor mold, there was no significant difference between the shear bond strengths of SB, EB and CSE to dentin, and SB, X and SE to enamel (p > 0.05). The one-step self-etch AE system delivered the lowest shear bond strengths (23.9 MPa) to enamel (p < 0.05). The two-step self-etch system AS delivered the lowest shear bond strengths (23.9 MPa) to dentin (p < 0.05).
自酸蚀粘接系统易于使用，在口腔临床中广受欢迎。本研究检测了四种自酸蚀粘接系统和一种两步酸蚀-冲洗粘接系统对牙本质和釉质的剪切粘接强度。使用 200 颗人离体无龋磨牙。从 100 颗牙齿的颊面去除约 0.5mm 的牙釉质，确定该釉质表面的粘接强度。剩余 100 颗牙齿的颊面被磨除，在牙本质上形成标准化的玷污层。使用五种粘接系统：Adper Single Bond Plus（ASB）：两步酸蚀-冲洗）；Adper Scotchbond SE（AS）、Clearfil SE Bond（CSE：均为两步自酸蚀）；XENO V（X）和 Adper Easy Bond（AE）：均为一步自酸蚀）。使用每种粘接系统在低 C 因子（0.2）和高 C 因子（4.4）模具（每组 10 个牙）中以低配置（C）将 Filtek Z250 复合材料粘结到牙齿上。将样本热循环 2000 次，然后进行剪切粘接强度测试。使用 Fisher's PLSD 多重比较检验对数据进行方差分析比较。三因素方差分析表明，总体而言，低 C 因子组的剪切粘接强度显著更高（4.33MPa，p<0.0001）。粘接系统之间的剪切粘接强度也存在显著差异（p<0.0001）。高 C 因子模具对所有粘接系统以及牙釉质和牙本质都有相同的不利影响，但粘接系统对牙釉质和牙本质的作用不同（三因素方差分析，p<0.0001）。两步酸蚀-冲洗系统（ASB）始终提供最高的粘接强度（34.6-41.5MPa）。Fisher's PLSD 比较表明，在高 C 因子模具中，SB、EB 和 CSE 与牙本质的剪切粘接强度以及 SB、X 和 SE 与牙釉质之间没有显著差异（p>0.05）。一步自酸蚀 AE 系统对牙釉质的剪切粘接强度最低（23.9MPa）（p<0.05）。两步自酸蚀系统 AS 对牙本质的剪切粘接强度最低（23.9MPa）（p<0.05）。
