Xing Y H, Lin F, Yue L
Department of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2018 May 9;53(5):328-332. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2018.05.008.
To investigate the effect of silane coupling agent on composite-composite bond strength, and to provide experimental basis for improving composite-composite bond strength clinically. Self-etching adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) and silane-containing universal adhesive Single Bond Universal (SBU) were used as adhesives. A silane coupling agent (RelyX ceramic primer) was tested. P60 resin composite blocks were prepared and divided into 4 groups according to whether silane coupling agent was applied or the type of the adhesives: CSE group, in which CSE was applied as an adhesive; Silane + CSE group, in which the surface was treated with silane coupling agent followed by CSE; SBU group, in which SBU was applied as an adhesive; Silane+ SBU group, in which the surface was treated with silane coupling agent followed by SBU, then filling a new composite. All the composite blocks were cut into about twenty 1 mm×1 mm×14 mm samples to detect the micro-tensile bond strength. Fractographic analysis were performed under a three-dimensional laser scanning microscope. The micro-tensile bond strength data were analyzed statistically by one-way ANOVA and the failure pattern data were analyzed statistically by -square test. Silane + SBU group [(69.6 ± 3.3) MPa] showed a significantly higher micro-tensile bond strength than the other groups (<0.05). Silane+CSE group showed a significantly higher micro-tensile bond strength [(63.9±3.7) MPa] than CSE group [(55.7±4.2) MPa] and SBU group [(55.4±4.0) MPa] (<0.05); There was no significant difference in micro-tensile bond strength between the SBU group and the CSE group (>0.05). Failure patterns in the 4 groups were adhesive failure, cohesive failure and mixed failure. There was no significant difference in the proportion of adhesive failure between the Silane+CSE group and the Silane+SBU group, and the proportion of adhesive failure in these two groups were significantly less than that in the CSE and the SBU group (<0.05). Silane coupling agent pretreatment could improve composite-composite bond strength, however, the bond strength could not be higher when silane was mixed with adhesives in one bottle.
探讨硅烷偶联剂对复合树脂间粘结强度的影响，为临床提高复合树脂间粘结强度提供实验依据。采用自酸蚀粘结剂Clearfil SE Bond（CSE）和含硅烷的通用粘结剂Single Bond Universal（SBU）作为粘结剂。测试一种硅烷偶联剂（RelyX陶瓷底漆）。制备P60树脂复合树脂块，并根据是否应用硅烷偶联剂或粘结剂类型分为4组：CSE组，应用CSE作为粘结剂；硅烷+CSE组，先用硅烷偶联剂处理表面，然后应用CSE；SBU组，应用SBU作为粘结剂；硅烷+SBU组，先用硅烷偶联剂处理表面，然后应用SBU，再充填新的复合树脂。将所有复合树脂块切成1mm×1mm×14mm的样本以检测微拉伸粘结强度。在三维激光扫描显微镜下进行断口分析。微拉伸粘结强度数据采用单因素方差分析进行统计学分析，失效模式数据采用卡方检验进行统计学分析。硅烷+SBU组[（69.6±3.3）MPa]的微拉伸粘结强度显著高于其他组（P<0.05）。硅烷+CSE组的微拉伸粘结强度[（63.9±3.7）MPa]显著高于CSE组[（55.7±4.2）MPa]和SBU组[（55.4±4.0）MPa]（P<0.05）；SBU组和CSE组的微拉伸粘结强度无显著差异（P>0.05）。4组的失效模式为粘结性失效、内聚性失效和混合性失效。硅烷+CSE组和硅烷+SBU组的粘结性失效比例无显著差异，且这两组的粘结性失效比例显著低于CSE组和SBU组（P<0.05）。硅烷偶联剂预处理可提高复合树脂间粘结强度，然而，当硅烷与粘结剂混合在一瓶中时，粘结强度不会更高。
