Suppr超能文献

不同牙釉质表面处理方法对窝沟封闭剂微渗漏的影响。

The effect of different enamel surface treatments on the microleakage of fissure sealants.

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.

出版信息

Lasers Med Sci. 2012 Jan;27(1):153-60. doi: 10.1007/s10103-011-0918-x. Epub 2011 Apr 8.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different techniques of surface treatment on the microleakage of a fissure sealant in molar teeth. A total of 50 freshly extracted noncarious human third molars were randomly assigned to one of five groups. Occlusal fissures were treated with one of the following: acid etching with 35% orthophosphoric acid (group 1); fissurotomy with a Fissurotomy Micro NTF metal bur (group 2); laser etching with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 2 W and 20 Hz (group 3); laser etching with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 2 W and 40 Hz (group 4); and air abrasion for 20 s with 30-µm Al(2)O(3) particles via a CoJet Prep device (group 5). After surface pretreatment, a resin-based sealant was applied to the fissures. The sample teeth were subjected to thermocycling and stored in distilled water at 37°C for 1 month. Following immersion in 0.5% basic fuchsin solution for 24 h, three buccolingual slices of each sample tooth were scored under a stereomicroscope, and the morphological appearance of the area between the enamel surface and fissure sealant was examined under a scanning electron microscope. The Kruskal-Wallis test and one-way ANOVA revealed significant differences in marginal leakage, as follows: group 1 showed significantly lower scores than groups 2 and 5, the scores of groups 1, 3 and 4 were not significantly different, and group 2 showed significantly higher scores than groups 3 and 4. Laser irradiation, the metal bur, and the CoJet Prep device did not eliminate the need for acid etching of the enamel prior to placement of a fissure sealant. Laser etching at 2 W (20 Hz or 40 Hz) may be an alternative to conventional acid-etching.

摘要

本研究旨在评估不同表面处理技术对窝沟封闭剂微渗漏的影响。共选取 50 颗新鲜无龋第三磨牙,随机分为 5 组。采用以下方法处理咬合面窝沟:35%磷酸酸蚀(第 1 组);Fissurotomy Micro NTF 金属车针窝沟切开(第 2 组);2 W、20 Hz 的 Er,Cr:YSGG 激光蚀刻(第 3 组);2 W、40 Hz 的 Er,Cr:YSGG 激光蚀刻(第 4 组);CoJet Prep 装置用 30-μm Al2O3 颗粒喷砂 20 s(第 5 组)。表面预处理后,将树脂基封闭剂应用于窝沟。将样本牙进行热循环,在 37°C 的蒸馏水中储存 1 个月。将样本在 0.5%碱性品红溶液中浸泡 24 h 后,对每个样本牙的三个颊舌切片进行评分,在体视显微镜下观察牙釉质表面和窝沟封闭剂之间区域的形态外观,在扫描电子显微镜下进行检查。Kruskal-Wallis 检验和单因素方差分析显示,边缘渗漏存在显著差异,如下:第 1 组的评分显著低于第 2 组和第 5 组,第 1、3 和 4 组的评分无显著差异,第 2 组的评分显著高于第 3 组和第 4 组。激光照射、金属车针和 CoJet Prep 装置并不能消除在放置窝沟封闭剂之前对牙釉质进行酸蚀的必要性。2 W(20 Hz 或 40 Hz)激光蚀刻可能是传统酸蚀的替代方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验