Tjan A H, Morgan D L
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Loma Linda University, School of Dentistry, Calif.
J Prosthet Dent. 1988 Feb;59(2):137-41. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(88)90002-9.
This study compared the flexural strengths and bond strengths to dentin and enamel of two brands of silver-reinforced glass ionomers with their respective unfilled glass-ionomer cements for luting. The results led to the following conclusions. 1. No significant differences in bond strengths to tooth substrates were recorded between silver-reinforced and unfilled glass ionomers. 2. Although the mean bond-strength values of enamel were higher than those of dentin, no statistically significant differences were observed. 3. No significant differences in bond strengths to tooth substrates were observed between the two brands of glass ionomers studied. 4. No differences in flexural strengths were recorded between the silver-reinforced glass ionomer and glass ionomer of a similar brand for luting. 5. Ketac-Silver and Ketac-Cem cements had significantly higher flexural strength than Fuji II Lumi Alloy and Fuji I cements.
本研究比较了两个品牌的银增强玻璃离子水门汀与其各自用于粘结的未填充玻璃离子水门汀对牙本质和牙釉质的抗折强度及粘结强度。结果得出以下结论。1. 银增强玻璃离子水门汀和未填充玻璃离子水门汀在与牙齿基质的粘结强度上无显著差异。2. 虽然牙釉质的平均粘结强度值高于牙本质，但未观察到统计学上的显著差异。3. 在所研究的两个品牌的玻璃离子水门汀之间，与牙齿基质的粘结强度无显著差异。4. 银增强玻璃离子水门汀与用于粘结的类似品牌的玻璃离子水门汀在抗折强度上无差异。5. Ketac-Silver和Ketac-Cem水门汀的抗折强度显著高于Fuji II Lumi Alloy和Fuji I水门汀。
