Akturk E, Bektas O O, Ozkanoglu S, G Akin E G
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Sakarya Univercity, Sakarya, Turkey.
Niger J Clin Pract. 2019 Dec;22(12):1758-1764. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_281_19.
The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the effects of the application of three different cavity disinfecting agents to dentin on the micro-shear bond strength (μ-SBS) of one self-etch and two universal adhesive systems.
In total, 120 caries-free human permanent molar teeth were used in this study. Mid-coronal dentin surfaces were revealed by cutting occlusal enamel and a standard smear layer was obtained by using 600-800-1200 grid silicon carbide abrasive papers. Specimens were randomly assigned to four groups according to the disinfectant used: Group 1: Control (no disinfectant); Group 2: 2% chlorhexidine based (Consepsis); Group 3: 10 ppm ozonated water (TeknOzone); Group 4: 5% boric acid (Handmade). Each group was divided into three subgroups according to the type of adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond, OptiBond XTR, and Tokuyama Universal). Specimens were bonded using either Clearfil SE Bond, OptiBond XTR or Tokuyama Universal, which were employed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Resin composite microcylinders were bonded using Tygon tubes for μ-SBS testing. After specimens were stored for 24 h, at 37°C in distilled water, μ-SBS test was measured with a universal test machine (LF Plus, Lloyd, Instrument). μ-SBS results were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's tests.
When the mean microshear bond strength values of the control group were compared, the difference between the subgroups was not significant (P < 0.05). When the mean microshear bond strength values of the chx, ozonated water, and boric acid were compared, the difference between Clearfil SE Bond and Tokuyama Universal was significant (P < 0.05) and the difference between the other groups was not significant (P > 0.05).
Ozonated water and boric acid may be as an alternative to other materials used as cavity disinfectants.
本体外研究旨在比较三种不同窝洞消毒剂应用于牙本质后对一种自酸蚀和两种通用粘结系统的微剪切粘结强度（μ-SBS）的影响。
本研究共使用120颗无龋的人类恒牙。通过切割咬合面釉质暴露牙冠中部牙本质表面，并使用600-800-1200目碳化硅砂纸获得标准玷污层。根据所使用的消毒剂，将标本随机分为四组：第1组：对照组（不使用消毒剂）；第2组：2%氯己定基（Consepsis）；第3组：10 ppm臭氧水（TeknOzone）；第4组：5%硼酸（自制）。根据粘结剂类型，每组再分为三个亚组（Clearfil SE Bond、OptiBond XTR和德山通用粘结剂）。使用Clearfil SE Bond、OptiBond XTR或德山通用粘结剂按照制造商说明进行粘结。使用泰贡管粘结树脂复合材料微柱进行μ-SBS测试。标本在37°C蒸馏水中储存24小时后，使用万能试验机（LF Plus，劳埃德仪器公司）测量μ-SBS。μ-SBS结果通过单因素方差分析（ANOVA）和Tukey检验进行分析。
比较对照组的平均微剪切粘结强度值时，亚组间差异不显著（P<0.05）。比较氯己定、臭氧水和硼酸的平均微剪切粘结强度值时，Clearfil SE Bond和德山通用粘结剂之间差异显著（P<0.05），其他组间差异不显著（P>0.05）。
臭氧水和硼酸可作为窝洞消毒剂替代其他材料。
