树脂水门汀与牙本质的黏附：黏附促进剂、即时牙本质封闭策略及表面处理的影响

Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning.

作者信息

van den Breemer Carline Rg, Özcan Mutlu, Pols Margot Re, Postema Anique R, Cune Marco S, Gresnigt Marco Mm

出版信息

Int J Esthet Dent. 2019;14(1):52-63.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to dentin after applying two adhesive (A) systems with a combination of four different immediate dentin sealing (IDS) strategies, and two surface conditioning (SC) methods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Human third molars (n = 140) were collected and randomly split (n = 70 each) between the two A systems (Clearfil SE Bond; Kuraray [AC] and Optibond FL; Kerr [AO]). The A groups were further divided into four IDS strategies (2 x one adhesive layer (IDS-1L); 2 x two adhesive layers (IDS-2L); 2 x one adhesive layer and one flowable layer (IDS-F); 2 x no adhesive layer (delayed dentin sealing [DDS]). Finally, each strategy group was categorized into one of the two SC methods (only pumice [SC-P] or pumice and silica coating [SC-PS]), except the DDS group, where only SC-P was used. This resulted in 14 groups of 10 specimens each. The occlusal coronal third was removed from each molar crown with a diamond saw (Isomet 1000), and IDS was applied, followed by temporary restorations. These were removed after 2 weeks of water storage, and the IDS surfaces were subsequently conditioned. The standard adhesive procedure (Syntac Primer and Adhesive, Heliobond; Ivoclar Vivadent) was executed, followed by the application of a resin cement (Variolink II; Ivoclar Vivadent) and photopolymerization. All specimens were subjected to thermocyclic aging (10,000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C). Shear force was applied to the adhesive interface in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Fracture types and locations after loading were classified. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent samples t tests.

RESULTS

AO groups exhibited higher mean SBS values (14.4 ± 6.43) than AC groups (12.85 ± 4.97) (P = 0.03). ANOVA showed the main effect of the applications on the SBS in the different groups (P = 0.00). Both DDS groups showed significantly lower SBS values compared with all the IDS groups (IDS-1L, IDS-2L, IDS-F). No significant differences in SBS results were found between the IDS groups (P = 0.43) and between the SC methods (P = 0.76). Dentin-cement interface failures diminished with the application of IDS.

CONCLUSION

IDS improves the SBS compared with DDS. No significant differences were found between the tested conditioning methods.

摘要

目的

本研究评估了在应用两种粘结剂（A）系统并结合四种不同的即时牙本质封闭（IDS）策略以及两种表面处理（SC）方法后，树脂水门汀与牙本质之间的剪切粘结强度（SBS）。

材料与方法

收集人第三磨牙（n = 140），并在两种A系统（Clearfil SE Bond；可乐丽[AC]和Optibond FL； Kerr[AO]）之间随机分成两组（每组n = 70）。A组进一步分为四种IDS策略（2×一层粘结剂（IDS - 1L）；2×两层粘结剂（IDS - 2L）；2×一层粘结剂和一层可流动层（IDS - F）；2×无粘结剂层（延迟牙本质封闭[DDS]））。最后，除DDS组仅使用SC - P外，每个策略组分为两种SC方法之一（仅用浮石[SC - P]或浮石和二氧化硅涂层[SC - PS]）。这产生了14组，每组10个标本。用金刚石锯（Isomet 1000）从每个磨牙牙冠上切除咬合面冠方三分之一，进行IDS处理，然后进行临时修复。储水2周后去除临时修复体，随后对IDS表面进行处理。执行标准粘结程序（Syntac Primer和Adhesive，Heliobond；义获嘉伟瓦登特），然后应用树脂水门汀（Variolink II；义获嘉伟瓦登特）并进行光固化。所有标本均进行热循环老化（10,000次循环，5°C至55°C）。在万能试验机中以1 mm/min的速度对粘结界面施加剪切力。对加载后的断裂类型和位置进行分类。使用方差分析（ANOVA）和独立样本t检验分析数据。

结果

AO组的平均SBS值（14.4±6.43）高于AC组（12.85±4.97）（P = 0.03）。方差分析显示不同组中应用对SBS有主要影响（P = 0.00）。与所有IDS组（IDS - 1L、IDS - 2L、IDS - F）相比，两个DDS组的SBS值均显著较低。IDS组之间（P = 0.43）和SC方法之间（P = 0.76）在SBS结果上未发现显著差异。应用IDS后牙本质 - 水门汀界面失败减少。