自粘接水泥和传统树脂水泥与硅烷化陶瓷粘结的粘结降解行为。

Bond degradation behavior of self-adhesive cement and conventional resin cements bonded to silanized ceramic.

机构信息

Division of Prosthodontics, The Stomatological Hospital Affiliated Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2011 Mar;105(3):177-84. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60026-7.

DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60026-7

PMID:21356410

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Self-adhesive resin cement with the characteristics of glass ionomer cement is more susceptible to water than conventional resin cements. It is unknown if there is a higher risk of bond degradation at the interface with silanized ceramic in an oral environment.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond degradation behavior of self-adhesive cement under simulated oral conditions, by comparing it with the behavior of 3 conventional resin cements.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three conventional resin cements, Linkamx HV (LMHV), Clearfil Esthetic Cement (CEC), and SuperBond (SB), were bonded to silanized ceramic (ProCAD) with the manufacturer's recommended silane coupler (GC Ceramic Primer (GCCP), Clearfil Ceramic Primer (CCP), and Porcelain Liner M (PLM), respectively), while a self-adhesive cement (G-CEM) was bonded with each of the 3 silane couplers. Maximum water sorption and solubility of the resin cements were measured according to the ISO 4049 standard during 6 weeks of water storage. The microshear bond strength of each silane/cement group (n=10 per thermal cycling subgroup) was tested after 0, 10,000, and 30,000 thermal cycles (TC), and bond failure types were counted. One- and two-way ANOVAs and the Tukey multiple comparisons test (α=.05) were used to evaluate the bond strength data.

RESULTS

G-CEM had significantly higher water sorption (P<.001) and solubility than conventional resin cements. Statistical analysis showed that the bond strength of all silane/cement groups was reduced significantly by thermal cycling (P=.01 for CCP/G-CEM, P=.003 for GCCP/LMHV, P<.001 for other groups). The bond strength of G-CEM with the 3 silane couplers was significantly degraded from TC 0 to 10,000 (P<.001 for GCCP/G-CEM and PLM/G-CEM, P=.01 for CCP/G-CEM); however, the bond strength appeared to stabilize with no significant degradation from TC 10,000 to 30,000. This behavior was different from that of conventional resin cements, which demonstrated bond degradation throughout TC 0-30,000. After TC 30,000, the bond strength of G-CEM did not differ significantly from that of the 3 conventional resin cements.

CONCLUSIONS

The bond degradation behavior of G-CEM under thermal cycling conditions differs from that of conventional resin cements.

摘要

问题陈述

具有玻璃离子水泥特性的自粘接树脂水泥比传统树脂水泥更容易受到水的影响。在口腔环境中，与硅烷化陶瓷的界面处，自粘接水泥是否存在更高的粘结降解风险，目前尚不清楚。

目的

本研究旨在通过与 3 种传统树脂水泥进行比较，评估自粘接水泥在模拟口腔条件下的粘结降解行为。

材料和方法

用制造商推荐的硅烷偶联剂（GC 陶瓷底漆（GCCP）、Clearfil 陶瓷底漆（CCP）和 Porcelain Liner M（PLM）分别将三种传统树脂水泥（Linkamx HV（LMHV）、Clearfil Esthetic Cement（CEC）和 SuperBond（SB））粘结到硅烷化陶瓷（ProCAD）上，而自粘接水泥（G-CEM）则与三种硅烷偶联剂中的每一种结合。根据 ISO 4049 标准，在 6 周的水储存期间测量树脂水泥的最大吸水率和溶解度。在 0、10000 和 30000 次热循环（TC）后，测试每组硅烷/水泥（每组 10 个热循环亚组）的微剪切粘结强度，并计算粘结失效类型。采用单因素和双因素方差分析以及 Tukey 多重比较检验（α=.05）对粘结强度数据进行评估。

结果

G-CEM 的吸水率（P<.001）和溶解度明显高于传统树脂水泥。统计分析显示，所有硅烷/水泥组的粘结强度在热循环后显著降低（P=.01 用于 CCP/G-CEM，P=.003 用于 GCCP/LMHV，P<.001 用于其他组）。G-CEM 与 3 种硅烷偶联剂的粘结强度从 TC 0 到 10000 显著降低（GCCP/G-CEM 和 PLM/G-CEM 均 P<.001，CCP/G-CEM 为 P=.01）；然而，从 TC 10000 到 30000，粘结强度似乎稳定，没有明显的降解。这种行为与传统树脂水泥不同，传统树脂水泥在 TC 0-30000 期间表现出粘结降解。经过 30000TC 后，G-CEM 的粘结强度与 3 种传统树脂水泥没有显著差异。