Habib Syed Rashid, Ansari Abdul Sadekh, Bajunaid Salwa Omar, Alshahrani Abdullah, Javed Muhammad Qasim
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Prosthodontics, Dental University Hospital, King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Eur J Dent. 2020 Mar;14(2):224-232. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1708560. Epub 2020 Apr 13.
Verification of the accuracy of crown fit before final cementation is imperative. The aim of this study was to evaluate the film thickness of commonly used dental crown disclosing materials and their comparison with final cement thickness.
AND METHODS: One hundred fifty provisional crowns (Protemp) were fabricated on standardized resin dies and divided into five groups ( = 150; = 30) based on five disclosing agents: A = Fit-Checker auto-mix; B = Okklu-top; C = Express; D = Fit-Checker hand-mix; E = Coltene PSI, and Final cement = Relyx U200. Crowns were loaded with test materials, tried over dies under load (50N), and later cemented under same load. Film thickness (µm) was recorded between crown margin and the finish line of die after loading with test material and final cementation using a digital microscope.
Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, Tukey's and paired -test were used for statistical analysis ( < 0.05).
Significant variations were found between the film thicknesses of the five disclosing agents ( = 0.019). Group-A showed the lowest (131.67 ± 101.10 μm), while group-B (295.00 ± 263.88 μm) showed the highest film thickness ( = 0.011). Film thicknesses after cementation were similar for groups ( = 0.957). Significant difference was observed for group-B disclosing agent versus final cement ( = 0.010). The lowest mean difference between the film thicknesses of the disclosing agent and final cementation of 13.1 μm was revealed for group-A.
Variations in the film thicknesses of the tested disclosing agents were found. Fit-Checker auto-mix was found with minimal film thickness and satisfied the requirements as the disclosing agent, while Okklu-top aerosol spray did not.
在最终粘结之前验证牙冠贴合的准确性至关重要。本研究的目的是评估常用牙冠显示材料的薄膜厚度,并将其与最终粘结剂厚度进行比较。
在标准化树脂模型上制作150个临时牙冠(Protemp),并根据五种显示剂分为五组(n = 150;每组 = 30):A = Fit-Checker自动混合剂;B = Okklu-top;C = Express;D = Fit-Checker手动混合剂;E = 科尔tene PSI,最终粘结剂 = Relyx U200。牙冠加载测试材料,在负载(50N)下在模型上试戴,随后在相同负载下粘结。使用数字显微镜记录加载测试材料和最终粘结后牙冠边缘与模型修整线之间的薄膜厚度(μm)。
采用描述性统计、方差分析、Tukey检验和配对检验进行统计分析(P < 0.05)。
发现五种显示剂的薄膜厚度之间存在显著差异(P = 0.019)。A组显示最低值(131.67 ± 101.10 μm),而B组(295.00 ± 263.88 μm)显示最高薄膜厚度(P = 0.011)。粘结后各组的薄膜厚度相似(P = 0.957)。观察到B组显示剂与最终粘结剂之间存在显著差异(P = 0.010)。A组显示剂与最终粘结的薄膜厚度之间的最低平均差异为13.1μm。
发现测试显示剂的薄膜厚度存在差异。发现Fit-Checker自动混合剂的薄膜厚度最小,满足作为显示剂的要求,而Okklu-top气雾剂喷雾则不满足。