Gorucu Jale, Gurgan Sevil, Cakir Filiz Yalcin, Bicer Ceren Ozge, Gorucu Hande
Hacettepe University, School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey.
Photomed Laser Surg. 2011 Mar;29(3):205-11. doi: 10.1089/pho.2009.2752. Epub 2010 Nov 6.
The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the microleakage of direct composite veneer restorations prepared by a conventional dental bur or Er,Cr:YSGG (erbium, chromium doped yttrium scandium gallium garnet) laser and etched with different procedures.
Fifty maxillary incisor teeth prepared for direct veneers with gingival margins in dentin and incisal margins in enamel were randomly divided into five groups (n = 10): group 1 (control), prepared with diamond bur and etched with phosphoric acid; group 2, prepared with diamond bur and etched with Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Waterlase MD/Biolase); group 3, prepared with laser and not etched; group 4, prepared with laser and etched with phosphoric acid; and group 5, prepared and etched with laser. After the application of the etch and rinse adhesive system (Prime & Bond NT/Dentsply), teeth were restored with the nano ceramic restorative material (Ceram X Duo/Dentsply), subjected to thermocycling and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 h. The teeth were sectioned longitudinally and dye penetration was evaluated by a binocular stereomicroscope equipped with a measuring device. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. The level of significance was set at p = 0.05.
Significant differences were observed in enamel of the five groups (p < 0.05). Minimal microleakage was observed in groups 1 and 3. The highest microleakage was evaluated in group 5 (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found among the five groups in dentin (p > 0.05). No differences were recorded between the microleakage values in enamel and dentin within each group and this was valid for all groups (p > 0.05).
The results confirmed that enamel and dentin surfaces prepared with Er,Cr:YSGG laser for direct composite veneer restorations may provide comparable sealing.
本体外研究的目的是比较用传统牙科车针或铒铬:钇钪镓石榴石(Er,Cr:YSGG)激光制备并采用不同蚀刻程序的直接复合贴面修复体的微渗漏情况。
将50颗上颌切牙制备成直接贴面,龈缘位于牙本质,切缘位于釉质,随机分为五组(n = 10):第1组(对照组),用金刚砂车针制备并用磷酸蚀刻;第2组,用金刚砂车针制备并用Er,Cr:YSGG激光(Waterlase MD/Biolase)蚀刻;第3组,用激光制备且未蚀刻;第4组,用激光制备并用磷酸蚀刻;第5组,用激光制备并蚀刻。应用蚀刻冲洗粘结系统(Prime & Bond NT/登士柏)后,用纳米陶瓷修复材料(Ceram X Duo/登士柏)修复牙齿,进行热循环处理,然后浸入0.5%碱性品红染料中24小时。将牙齿纵向切片,用配备测量装置的双目立体显微镜评估染料渗透情况。数据采用Kruskal-Wallis检验和Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行分析。显著性水平设定为p = 0.05。
五组在釉质中的微渗漏情况存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。第1组和第3组的微渗漏最小。第5组的微渗漏评估值最高(p < 0.05)。五组在牙本质中的微渗漏情况无显著差异(p > 0.05)。每组釉质和牙本质的微渗漏值之间无差异,所有组均如此(p > 0.05)。
结果证实,用Er,Cr:YSGG激光制备用于直接复合贴面修复体的釉质和牙本质表面可能提供相当的封闭性。