Department of Oral Rehabilitation, University of Otago School of Dentistry, Dunedin, New Zealand.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2012 Aug;24(4):278-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2011.00495.x. Epub 2011 Nov 17.
Ultrasonic instruments have recently been developed for finishing crown preparations. They are successful in accessing difficult areas on the preparation margin, but their effects on the dentin surface and on bond strength are contradictory.
The aim was to evaluate the condition of crown preparation margins finished using new ultrasonic instruments and to assess their effects on dentin bond strength.
Characteristics of tooth surfaces prepared using two different ultrasonic protocols were compared; Perfect Margin Shoulder (PMS) (PMS 3, Satelec, Merignac, France) 1, 2, and 3 (complete finishing) versus PMS 1 and 2 (partial finishing). They were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and surface roughness analysis. Bonding of composite resin to dentin surfaces prepared with the complete PMS kit was compared with dentin surfaces prepared with finishing diamond burs, using micro-tensile testing.
SEM images revealed a clear difference between the two preparation sequences (PMS 1, 2 versus PMS 1, 2, and 3). Surfaces finished using the PMS tips 1, 2, and 3 appeared continuous, even, and smooth compared with PMS tips 1 and 2 only. The additional use of the PMS 3 uncoated tip enhanced smear layer removal. There was no significant difference when comparing the surface roughness obtained with the PMS 1, 2, and 3 protocol with the PMS 1 and 2 only (p > 0.05). Micro-tensile bond strength was not significantly different between the surfaces prepared with the ultrasonic instruments and the surfaces prepared with the diamond burs (p > 0.05).
The use of the complete PMS finishing kit (PMS 1, 2, and 3) produced better quality finishing lines than PMS 1 and 2. The use of ultrasonic instruments to prepare dentin resulted in comparable bond strengths to the use of diamond burs.
The extremely precise preparation margin possible with ultrasonic instruments improves the quality and accuracy of crown preparations, which may lead to better impressions and closer adaptation of restorations. The complete set of three Perfect Margin Shoulder instruments is recommended, which can produce comparable bond strengths to preparations with rotary instruments.
最近开发了用于牙冠预备的超声仪器。它们成功地到达了预备边缘的困难区域,但它们对牙本质表面和粘结强度的影响是相互矛盾的。
旨在评估使用新型超声仪器制备牙冠预备边缘的情况,并评估其对牙本质粘结强度的影响。
比较了两种不同超声方案制备的牙体表面的特征;完美边缘肩台(PMS)(法国赛特力,梅里尼亚克的 PMS 3、2、1 号)的 1、2、3 号(完全修整)与 PMS 1 和 2 号(部分修整)。使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和表面粗糙度分析进行评估。通过微拉伸试验比较了用完整 PMS 套件制备的复合树脂与用金刚石车针制备的牙本质表面的粘结强度。
SEM 图像显示两种预备序列(PMS 1、2 与 PMS 1、2、3)之间存在明显差异。与仅使用 PMS 1 和 2 号尖端相比,使用 PMS 1、2 和 3 号尖端制备的表面连续、均匀、光滑。额外使用 PMS 3 号未涂层尖端可增强对玷污层的去除。与仅使用 PMS 1 和 2 号时相比,使用 PMS 1、2 和 3 号方案获得的表面粗糙度没有显著差异(p > 0.05)。使用超声仪器制备的牙本质表面与使用金刚石车针制备的牙本质表面之间的微拉伸粘结强度无显著差异(p > 0.05)。
使用完整的 PMS 精修套件(PMS 1、2 和 3)产生的边缘质量优于 PMS 1 和 2。使用超声仪器制备牙本质可获得与使用金刚石车针相当的粘结强度。
超声仪器制备的极其精确的预备边缘可提高牙冠预备的质量和准确性,从而可能获得更好的印模和更紧密的修复体适应。建议使用完整的三套 Perfect Margin Shoulder 仪器,其粘结强度可与使用旋转器械制备的牙本质相媲美。