University of Campinas, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2010 May-Jun;35(3):345-52. doi: 10.2341/09-124-L.
This study compared the ability of adhesive systems to inhibit in vitro caries lesions in enamel under high cariogenic challenge. Bovine enamel blocks with cavity preparations were restored with AP-X resin composite (Kuraray Med) using four adhesives systems: Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Med); Clearfil Protect Bond (Kuraray Med); One-Up Bond F (Tokuyama) and Single Bond (3M ESPE). The specimens were submitted to an eight-day pH-cycling regimen. After cariogenic challenge, the enamel was evaluated to detect caries lesions using cross-sectional microhardness, polarized light microscopy and scanning electronic microscopy. Data from cross-sectional microhardness and polarized light microscopy evaluations were statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's test. The mineral % volume showed no statistical difference among adhesives (p > 0.05); however, polarized light microscopy analysis showed lower caries lesions with Clearfil Protect Bond (p < 0.05). The scanning electron microscopy images showed greater caries lesions and demineralization areas close to restorations for Clearfil SE Bond, One-Up Bond F and Single Bond compared to Clearfil Protect Bond. The pH-cycling regimen promoted subsurface enamel demineralization in all specimens treated. The polarized light microscopy and scanning electronic microscopy analyses showed that Clearfil Protect Bond seems to produce lower enamel demineralization around restorations; however, cross-sectional microhardness did not demonstrate differences among the adhesives.
本研究比较了在高致龋挑战下,黏结系统抑制牙釉质表面龋损的能力。使用 4 种黏结系统(Kuraray Med 的 Clearfil SE Bond、Clearfil Protect Bond、Tokuyama 的 One-Up Bond F 和 3M ESPE 的 Single Bond)对具有窝沟预备的牛牙釉质块进行修复,制备牛牙釉质块。将标本置于 8 天 pH 循环方案中。致龋挑战后,使用横截面显微硬度、偏光显微镜和扫描电子显微镜评估牙釉质以检测龋损。通过方差分析和 Tukey 检验对横截面显微硬度和偏光显微镜评估的数据进行统计学分析。矿物%体积在黏结剂之间无统计学差异(p > 0.05);然而,偏光显微镜分析显示,与其他黏结剂相比,Clearfil Protect Bond 具有更低的龋损(p < 0.05)。扫描电子显微镜图像显示,与 Clearfil Protect Bond 相比,Clearfil SE Bond、One-Up Bond F 和 Single Bond 周围的龋损和脱矿区域更大。pH 循环方案使所有处理标本的牙釉质表面下脱矿。偏光显微镜和扫描电子显微镜分析表明,Clearfil Protect Bond 似乎在修复体周围产生较低的牙釉质脱矿;然而,横截面显微硬度并未显示出黏结剂之间的差异。