Suppr超能文献

乳酸缓冲溶液中不同核桩材料粘结水门汀抗剪粘结强度的比较评价

Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Luting Cements to Different Core Buildup Materials in Lactic Acid Buffer Solution.

作者信息

Patil Siddharam M, Kamble Vikas B, Desai Raviraj G, Arabbi Kashinath C, Prakash Ved

机构信息

Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge, P.M.N.M. Dental College and Hospital , Bagalkot, Karnataka, India .

Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge, P.M.N.M. Dental College and Hospital , Bagalkot, Karnataka, India .

出版信息

J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Aug;9(8):ZC84-7. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/12333.6372. Epub 2015 Aug 1.

Abstract

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The core buildup material is used to restore badly broken down tooth to provide better retention for fixed restorations. The shear bond strength of a luting agent to core buildup is one of the crucial factors in the success of the cast restoration. The aim of this invitro study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength of luting cements with different core buildup materials in lactic acid buffer solution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two luting cements {Traditional Glass Ionomer luting cement (GIC) and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer luting cement (RMGIC)} and five core buildup materials {Silver Amalgam, Glass ionomer (GI), Glass Ionomer Silver Reinforced (GI Silver reinforced), Composite Resin and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer(RMGIC)} were selected for this study. Total 100 specimens were prepared with 20 specimens for each core buildup material using a stainless steel split metal die. Out of these 20 specimens, 10 specimens were bonded with each luting cement. All the bonded specimens were stored at 37(0)c in a 0.01M lactic acid buffer solution at a pH of 4 for 7days. Shear bond strength was determined using a Universal Testing Machine at a cross head speed of 0.5mm/min. The peak load at fracture was recorded and shear bond strength was calculated. The data was statistically analysed using Two-way ANOVA followed by HOLM-SIDAK method for pair wise comparison at significance level of p<0.05.

RESULTS

Two-Way ANOVA showed significant differences in bond strength of the luting cements (p<0.05) and core materials (p<0.05) and the interactions (p<0.05). Pairwise comparison of luting cements by HOLM-SIDAK test, showed that the RMGIC luting cement had higher shear bond strength values than Traditional GIC luting cement for all the core buildup materials. RMGIC core material showed higher bond strength values followed by Composite resin, GI silver reinforced, GI and silver amalgam core materials for both the luting agents.

CONCLUSION

Shear bond strength of RMGIC luting cement was significantly higher than traditional GIC luting cement for all core buildup materials except, for silver amalgam core buildup material. RMGIC core material showed highest shear bond strength values followed by Composite resin, GI Silver Reinforced, GI and Silver Amalgam core materials irrespective of luting cements.

摘要

目的

核心堆积材料用于修复严重破损的牙齿,为固定修复体提供更好的固位。粘结剂与核心堆积材料之间的剪切粘结强度是铸造修复成功的关键因素之一。本体外研究的目的是评估和比较不同核心堆积材料在乳酸缓冲溶液中的粘结剂剪切粘结强度。

材料与方法

本研究选用两种粘结剂{传统玻璃离子粘结剂(GIC)和树脂改性玻璃离子粘结剂(RMGIC)}和五种核心堆积材料{银汞合金、玻璃离子(GI)、玻璃离子银增强型(GI银增强型)、复合树脂和树脂改性玻璃离子(RMGIC)}。使用不锈钢分体金属模具,为每种核心堆积材料制备20个样本,共制备100个样本。在这20个样本中,每种粘结剂粘结10个样本。所有粘结样本在37℃、pH值为4的0.01M乳酸缓冲溶液中储存7天。使用万能试验机以0.5mm/min的十字头速度测定剪切粘结强度。记录断裂时的峰值载荷并计算剪切粘结强度。数据采用双向方差分析进行统计分析,然后采用HOLM-SIDAK方法进行两两比较,显著性水平为p<0.05。

结果

双向方差分析显示,粘结剂的粘结强度(p<0.05)、核心材料的粘结强度(p<0.05)以及两者的相互作用(p<0.05)存在显著差异。通过HOLM-SIDAK检验对粘结剂进行两两比较,结果表明,对于所有核心堆积材料,RMGIC粘结剂的剪切粘结强度值均高于传统GIC粘结剂。对于两种粘结剂,RMGIC核心材料的粘结强度值最高,其次是复合树脂、GI银增强型、GI和银汞合金核心材料。

结论

对于除银汞合金核心堆积材料外的所有核心堆积材料,RMGIC粘结剂的剪切粘结强度显著高于传统GIC粘结剂。无论使用何种粘结剂,RMGIC核心材料的剪切粘结强度值最高,其次是复合树脂、GI银增强型、GI和银汞合金核心材料。

相似文献

1
Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Luting Cements to Different Core Buildup Materials in Lactic Acid Buffer Solution.
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Aug;9(8):ZC84-7. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/12333.6372. Epub 2015 Aug 1.
2
Bond strength of luting cements to core foundation materials.
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010 Mar;31(2):140-6.
3
In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials.
J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Sep;92(3):265-73. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.06.027.
4
Effect of an adhesive resin luting agent on the dowel-head retention of three different core materials.
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 May;93(5):439-45. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.02.025.
5
Comparative evaluation of bond strengths of different core materials with various luting agents used for cast crown restorations.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012 Sep;12(3):168-74. doi: 10.1007/s13191-012-0127-8. Epub 2012 Jun 4.
6
An In Vitro Comparison of Shear Bond Strength for Heated Composite Resin With Three Conventional Luting Cements.
Cureus. 2023 Oct 16;15(10):e47110. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47110. eCollection 2023 Oct.
8
Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement with ProRoot MTA and MTA Angelus.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2024 Jan 1;25(1):35-40. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3611.
9
Bond strengths between composite resin and auto cure glass ionomer cement using the co-cure technique.
Aust Dent J. 2006 Jun;51(2):175-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2006.tb00423.x.
10
Evaluation of mechanical and adhesion properties of glass ionomer cement incorporating nano-sized hydroxyapatite particles.
Odontology. 2020 Jan;108(1):66-73. doi: 10.1007/s10266-019-00427-5. Epub 2019 Apr 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparative evaluation of bond strengths of different core materials with various luting agents used for cast crown restorations.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012 Sep;12(3):168-74. doi: 10.1007/s13191-012-0127-8. Epub 2012 Jun 4.
2
Bond strength of luting cements to core foundation materials.
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010 Mar;31(2):140-6.
3
Erosion of luting cements exposed to acidic buffer solutions.
Int J Prosthodont. 2007 Sep-Oct;20(5):494-5.
4
Bonding of composite to water aged composite with surface treatments.
Dent Mater. 2007 Apr;23(4):519-25. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.03.010. Epub 2006 Jun 9.
5
Ion release by resin-modified glass-ionomer cements into water and lactic acid solutions.
J Dent. 2006 Sep;34(8):539-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.08.007. Epub 2006 Feb 28.
6
Influence of loading types on the shear strength of the dentin-resin interface bonding.
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2001 Jan;12(1):39-44. doi: 10.1023/a:1013848901553.
8
Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers.
J Dent. 2003 Nov;31(8):521-5. doi: 10.1016/s0300-5712(03)00093-9.
9
Changes in properties of polyacid-modified composite resins (compomers) following storage in acidic solutions.
J Oral Rehabil. 2003 Jun;30(6):601-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01041.x.
10
Solubility and sorption of resin-based luting cements.
Oper Dent. 2000 Sep-Oct;25(5):434-40.

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