Dental School, Faculdades Unidas do Norte de Minas (FUNORTE), Montes Claros, Brazil.
Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Dec;22(9):2989-2996. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2390-5. Epub 2018 Feb 16.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of silorane-based composite restorations applied after different surface treatments.
This controlled and randomized clinical trial included 26 patients with class I restoration indications. The teeth were randomly assigned to the following treatments: control 1/G1, silorane specific self-etching adhesive (P90 self-etch primer and bond) + silorane-based composite resin (Filtek™ P90 low shrink posterior restorative); G2, 37% phosphoric acid + silorane specific self-etching adhesive + silorane-based composite resin; G3, blasting with aluminum oxide + silorane specific self-etching adhesive + silorane-based composite resin; and control 2/G4, self-etching adhesive (Adper™ SE Plus self-etch adhesive) + dimethacrylate-based composite resin (Filtek™ P60 posterior restorative). The clinical performance was evaluated at baseline and after 1 year.
A total of 141 restorations were made and evaluated. For all clinical criteria evaluated, no significant difference was found between the surface treatments at baseline and after 1 year (p > 0.05). After 1 year, only the group with 37% phosphoric acid + silorane specific self-etching adhesive (G2) showed a significant reduction in marginal adaptation (p < 0.05).
In general, all surface treatments showed an adequate clinical performance for silorane-based composite resin in class I restorations. However, a reduction in the marginal adaptation after 1 year was found when additional phosphoric acid etching was used prior to silorane specific self-etching adhesive.
The use of phosphoric acid etching prior to specific self-etching adhesive can adversely affect the marginal adaptation of silorane-based restorations.
本研究旨在评估不同表面处理后应用硅烷基复合树脂修复的临床性能。
本对照随机临床试验纳入 26 名有 I 类修复指征的患者。将牙齿随机分为以下处理组：对照组 1/G1，硅烷自酸蚀粘结剂（P90 自酸蚀底涂剂和粘结剂）+硅烷基复合树脂（Filtek™ P90 低收缩后牙修复树脂）；G2，37%磷酸酸蚀+硅烷自酸蚀粘结剂+硅烷基复合树脂；G3，氧化铝喷砂+硅烷自酸蚀粘结剂+硅烷基复合树脂；对照组 2/G4，自酸蚀粘结剂（Adper™ SE Plus 自酸蚀粘结剂）+双固化复合树脂（Filtek™ P60 后牙修复树脂）。基线和 1 年后对临床性能进行评估。
共制作和评估了 141 个修复体。所有临床评价标准，在基线和 1 年后，各组间无显著差异（p>0.05）。1 年后，仅 37%磷酸酸蚀+硅烷自酸蚀粘结剂组（G2）显示边缘适合性显著降低（p<0.05）。
总体而言，所有表面处理对 I 类修复的硅烷基复合树脂均显示出良好的临床性能。然而，在使用硅烷自酸蚀粘结剂前额外进行磷酸酸蚀时，发现 1 年后边缘适合性降低。
在使用特殊自酸蚀粘结剂前进行磷酸酸蚀可能会对硅烷基修复体的边缘适合性产生不利影响。
