Suppr超能文献

表面处理、硅烷和通用粘结剂对纳米填料复合修复体微剪切粘结强度的影响。

Effect of Surface Treatment, Silane, and Universal Adhesive on Microshear Bond Strength of Nanofilled Composite Repairs.

作者信息

Fornazari I A, Wille I, Meda E M, Brum R T, Souza E M

出版信息

Oper Dent. 2017 Jul/Aug;42(4):367-374. doi: 10.2341/16-259-L. Epub 2017 Apr 12.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatment and universal adhesive on the microshear bond strength of nanoparticle composite repairs.

METHODS

One hundred and forty-four specimens were built with a nanofilled composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra, 3M ESPE). The surfaces of all the specimens were polished with SiC paper and stored in distilled water at 37°C for 14 days. Half of the specimens were then air abraded with AlO particles and cleaned with phosphoric acid. Polished specimens (P) and polished and air-abraded specimens (A), respectively, were randomly divided into two sets of six groups (n=12) according to the following treatments: hydrophobic adhesive only (PH and AH, respectively), silane and hydrophobic adhesive (PCH, ACH), methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP)-containing silane and hydrophobic adhesive (PMH, AMH), universal adhesive only (PU, AU), silane and universal adhesive (PCU, ACU), and MDP-containing silane and universal adhesive (PMU, AMU). A cylinder with the same composite resin (1.1-mm diameter) was bonded to the treated surfaces to simulate the repair. After 48 hours, the specimens were subjected to microshear testing in a universal testing machine. The failure area was analyzed under an optical microscope at 50× magnification to identify the failure type, and the data were analyzed by three-way analysis of variance and the Games-Howell test (α=0.05).

RESULTS

The variables "surface treatment" and "adhesive" showed statistically significant differences for p<0.05. The highest mean shear bond strength was found in the ACU group but was not statistically different from the means for the other air-abraded groups except AH. All the polished groups except PU showed statistically significant differences compared with the air-abraded groups. The PU group had the highest mean among the polished groups. Cohesive failure was the most frequent failure mode in the air-abraded specimens, while mixed failure was the most common mode in the polished specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

While air abrasion with AlO particles increased the repair bond strength of the nanoparticle composite, the use of MDP-containing silane did not lead to a statistically significant increase in bond strength. Silane-containing universal adhesive on its own was as effective as any combination of silane and adhesive, particularly when applied on air-abraded surfaces.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估表面处理和通用粘结剂对纳米复合树脂修复体微剪切粘结强度的影响。

方法

用纳米填充复合树脂(Filtek Supreme Ultra,3M ESPE)制作144个试件。所有试件表面用碳化硅砂纸打磨,在37℃蒸馏水中储存14天。然后将一半试件用氧化铝颗粒进行气磨,并用磷酸清洗。根据以下处理方法,将打磨后的试件(P)和气磨后的试件(A)分别随机分为两组,每组六个亚组(n = 12):仅使用疏水粘结剂(分别为PH和AH)、硅烷和疏水粘结剂(PCH、ACH)、含甲基丙烯酰氧基癸基磷酸二氢酯(MDP)的硅烷和疏水粘结剂(PMH、AMH)、仅使用通用粘结剂(PU、AU)、硅烷和通用粘结剂(PCU、ACU)、含MDP的硅烷和通用粘结剂(PMU、AMU)。用相同的复合树脂制作一个圆柱体(直径1.1 mm)粘结到处理过的表面以模拟修复。48小时后,在万能试验机上对试件进行微剪切测试。在50倍放大倍数的光学显微镜下分析破坏区域以确定破坏类型,数据采用三因素方差分析和Games-Howell检验(α = 0.05)进行分析。

结果

“表面处理”和“粘结剂”变量在p < 0.05时有统计学显著差异。ACU组的平均剪切粘结强度最高,但与除AH组外的其他气磨组相比无统计学差异。除PU组外,所有打磨组与气磨组相比均有统计学显著差异。PU组在打磨组中均值最高。在气磨试件中,内聚破坏是最常见的破坏模式,而在打磨试件中,混合破坏是最常见的模式。

结论

虽然用氧化铝颗粒进行气磨可提高纳米复合树脂的修复粘结强度,但使用含MDP硅烷并未导致粘结强度有统计学显著提高。含硅烷的通用粘结剂本身与硅烷和粘结剂的任何组合效果一样,特别是应用于气磨表面时。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验