Mueller Jan, Yang Fan, Neumann Konrad, Kielbassa Andrej M
Department of operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University School of Denatl Medicine, CharitéCentrum 3, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Quintessence Int. 2011 Feb;42(2):135-47.
To evaluate the effects of materials and finishing procedures on the surface roughness of infiltrated subsurface bovine enamel lesions.
Eighty enamel specimens were prepared from 80 bovine incisors and partially varnished (control). The nonvarnished areas were demineralized (pH 4.95, 28 days) and etched with phosphoric acid gel (20%, 5 seconds). Specimens were randomly divided into two groups, which were each split into four subgroups (each n = 10): E1/E2 (Excite, Ivoclar Vivadent), F1/F2 (Fortify, Bisco), G1/G2 (Glaze and Bond, DMG), and I1/I2 (Icon, DMG). In group 1, resin materials were polymerized and polished using finishing strips by means of a polishing device; in group 2, excess material was removed with a rubber cup before polymerization (without polishing). The surface roughness (Sa) of control, demineralized, and treated surfaces were evaluated topometrically using a focus variation 3D scanning microscope.
Demineralized surfaces were significantly rougher than sound enamel (P < .0005, t test). Etching increased Sa significantly to more than 450% of demineralization values (P < .0005). Surfaces of nonpolished infiltrated lesions were significantly rougher than demineralized enamel (P < .0005), while no significant differences could be found among infiltrated subgroups (P = .067), nor between polished and nonpolished groups (P = .359). Application of Glaze and Bond (G2) appeared to reduce Sa values of etched lesions (P < .0005), while with all other subgroups Sa values improved only marginally.
Regarding surface roughness, the use of finishing strips after infiltration of subsurface lesions does not seem to be advantageous. Excess material should be removed before light curing, but surface quality of nonprocessed infiltrants seems to be perfectible.
评估材料和修整程序对浸润性牛牙釉质表面下病变表面粗糙度的影响。
从80颗牛切牙制备80个牙釉质标本,并部分涂漆(对照)。未涂漆区域进行脱矿(pH 4.95,28天),并用磷酸凝胶蚀刻(20%,5秒)。标本随机分为两组,每组再分为四个亚组(每组n = 10):E1/E2(Excite,义获嘉伟瓦登特公司)、F1/F2(Fortify,碧施公司)、G1/G2(Glaze and Bond,DMG公司)和I1/I2(Icon,DMG公司)。在第1组中,树脂材料通过抛光装置使用抛光条进行聚合和抛光;在第2组中,在聚合前用橡胶杯去除多余材料(不抛光)。使用聚焦变化3D扫描显微镜通过表面形貌测量法评估对照、脱矿和处理后表面的粗糙度(Sa)。
脱矿表面明显比正常牙釉质粗糙(P < .0005,t检验)。蚀刻使Sa显著增加至脱矿值的450%以上(P < .0005)。未抛光的浸润性病变表面明显比脱矿牙釉质粗糙(P < .0005),而在浸润亚组之间未发现显著差异(P = .067),抛光组和未抛光组之间也无显著差异(P = .359)。应用Glaze and Bond(G2)似乎降低了蚀刻病变的Sa值(P < .0005),而其他所有亚组的Sa值仅略有改善。
关于表面粗糙度,在表面下病变浸润后使用抛光条似乎并无优势。应在光固化前去除多余材料,但未处理的浸润剂的表面质量似乎是可以改善的。