Nujella B P Suryakumari, Choudary Manisha T, Reddy Satyanarayana P, Kumar M Kiran, Gopal T
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, MNR Dental College and Hospital, Sangareddy, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Contemp Clin Dent. 2012 Jan;3(1):22-6. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.94541.
The present study was conducted to determine and compare the shear bond strengths of Conventional glass ionomer; Resin-modified glass ionomer; Polyacid-modified composite and Composite Resin, and to assess and determine the mode of failure (adhesive, cohesive, mixed).
Occlusal dentin of 40 extracted human teeth were randomly divided into four groups of ten teeth, each based on the restorative materials tested as follows: Group I: Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement (Control); Group II: Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement; Group III: Polyacid-modified Composite Resin; Group IV: Hybrid Composite Resin. The bonded materials were subjected to shear bond strength (SBS) testing in a Instron Universal Testing Machine (UTM) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The bond failure location was examined by the use of a stereomicroscope at 10× magnification. The mean SBS of Groups I-IV obtained was 3.81, 9.71, 11.96 and 18.16 MPa, respectively. Comparison of mean shear bond strengths of all groups was done by one way ANOVA test and comparison of means in between groups by the Student's t test.
It is concluded that the compomer restorative materials show higher shear bond strength than conventional glass-ionomer and resin-modified glass-ionomer, but less than composite resin.
进行本研究以测定并比较传统玻璃离子水门汀、树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀、聚酸改性复合树脂和复合树脂的剪切粘结强度,并评估和确定失效模式(粘结性、内聚性、混合性)。
40颗拔除的人牙的咬合面牙本质被随机分为四组,每组10颗牙,每组根据所测试的修复材料如下:第一组:传统玻璃离子水门汀(对照组);第二组:树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀;第三组:聚酸改性复合树脂;第四组:混合复合树脂。将粘结材料在Instron万能试验机(UTM)中以0.5mm/min的十字头速度进行剪切粘结强度(SBS)测试。使用体视显微镜在10倍放大倍数下检查粘结失败位置。第一组至第四组获得的平均SBS分别为3.81、9.71、11.96和18.16MPa。通过单因素方差分析对所有组的平均剪切粘结强度进行比较,并通过学生t检验对组间均值进行比较。
得出结论,聚酸改性复合树脂修复材料显示出比传统玻璃离子水门汀和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀更高的剪切粘结强度,但低于复合树脂。