American Dental Association Foundation, Paffenbarger Research Center, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA.
Acta Biomater. 2011 May;7(5):2303-9. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.01.002. Epub 2011 Jan 11.
This paper compares the remineralization of human natural caries and artificial caries-like dentin lesions treated with a novel whisker-reinforced experimental composite resin (ART composite) with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) as control. Ten molars with moderate natural dentin caries were prepared (N). Artificial caries-like dentin lesions were prepared in occlusal dentin of 10 caries-free molars and demineralized at pH 4.3 for 48 h (A). The cavities were restored with ART composite or RM-GIC. All restored teeth were sliced into 120 μm sections. Transverse microradiography combined with digital image analysis was performed to analyze the change in mineral density at the same position in the specimens before and after 4 and 8 weeks remineralization/demineralization treatment. The mean percent remineralization ± standard deviation after 4 and 8 weeks are: N with ART composite, 27 ± 9 and 46 ± 14, respectively; N with RM-GIC, 18 ± 6 and 36 ± 11, respectively; A with ART composite, 48 ± 9 and 66 ± 11, respectively; A with RM-GIC, 50 ± 13 and 62 ± 11, respectively. There was a significant difference between the ART composite and RM-GIC for the remineralization of natural caries (P<0.05). For both restoratives there were significant differences between the remineralization of natural and artificial caries (P<0.001). The ART composite and RM-GIC remineralized natural and artificial caries differently, most likely due to differences in the microstructure and composition of the caries dentin.
本文比较了新型晶须增强实验性复合树脂(ART 复合树脂)和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(RM-GIC)对人天然龋齿和人工龋样牙本质病变再矿化的效果。制备 10 颗具有中度天然牙本质龋齿的磨牙(N)。在 10 颗无龋磨牙的咬合面牙本质上制备人工龋样牙本质病变,并在 pH 4.3 下脱矿 48 h(A)。用 ART 复合树脂或 RM-GIC 修复牙洞。所有修复后的牙齿均切成 120 μm 厚的切片。采用横切显微放射照相术联合数字图像分析,在再矿化/脱矿化处理前后,在标本的同一位置分析矿物质密度的变化。4 周和 8 周后再矿化的平均百分比(±标准差)分别为:用 ART 复合树脂处理的 N 组为 27±9%和 46±14%;用 RM-GIC 处理的 N 组为 18±6%和 36±11%;用 ART 复合树脂处理的 A 组为 48±9%和 66±11%;用 RM-GIC 处理的 A 组为 50±13%和 62±11%。ART 复合树脂和 RM-GIC 对天然龋的再矿化效果有显著差异(P<0.05)。对于两种修复体,天然和人工龋的再矿化效果均有显著差异(P<0.001)。ART 复合树脂和 RM-GIC 对天然和人工龋的再矿化效果不同,这很可能是由于牙本质的微观结构和成分不同所致。