Tjan A H, Dunn J R
Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, CA 92350.
J Am Dent Assoc. 1990 Dec;121(6):706-10. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1990.0270.
This study compared the microleakage of light-cured and auto-set glass ionomer liners used in Class V composite laminated glass ionomer restorations by determining the amount of microleakage at the gingival cementum/dentin margins. Standardized nonundercut V-shaped Class V cavities with gingival margins below the cementoenamel junction were prepared on the mesial and distal surfaces of 40 molars, establishing a total of 80 cavities, which were randomly divided into four groups. Each was lined with glass ionomers: group 1, Ketac-Bond (ESPE-Premier), which served as the control; group 2, XR-Ionomer (Kerr); group 3, XR-Ionomer with polyacrylic acid (PAA) pretreatment (Kerr); and group 4, Vitrabond (3M). Specimens were thermocycled for 300 cycles in 0.5% aqueous solution of basic fuchsin between 4 and 55 C with a 1-minute dwell time, and individually embedded in an epoxy resin. Statistical analysis indicated no differences among groups using the light-cured glass ionomer (groups 2 to 4), and they showed significantly less leakage than the control (group 1) at P less than 0.00001). Removal of the smear layer using 10% polyacrylic acid solution did not influence microleakage in restorations with light-cured glass ionomer liners.
本研究通过测定龈牙骨质/牙本质边缘的微渗漏量,比较了用于Ⅴ类复合层压玻璃离子修复体的光固化和自凝玻璃离子衬层的微渗漏情况。在40颗磨牙的近中面和远中面制备标准化的无倒凹Ⅴ形Ⅴ类洞,龈缘位于釉牙骨质界下方,共制备80个洞,随机分为四组。每组均用玻璃离子衬层:第1组为Ketac-Bond(ESPE-Premier),作为对照组;第2组为XR-Ionomer(Kerr);第3组为经聚丙烯酸(PAA)预处理的XR-Ionomer(Kerr);第4组为Vitrabond(3M)。将标本在4至55℃的0.5%碱性品红水溶液中进行300次热循环,每次停留1分钟,然后分别嵌入环氧树脂中。统计分析表明,使用光固化玻璃离子的组(第2至4组)之间无差异,且在P小于0.00001时,它们的渗漏明显少于对照组(第1组)。用10%聚丙烯酸溶液去除玷污层对用光固化玻璃离子衬层的修复体的微渗漏没有影响。