Alnakib Yasir, Alsaady Ammar
Department of conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Al-Ameed, Karbala, Iraq.
Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Mustansiriya University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2021 Mar 11;13:67-76. doi: 10.2147/CCIDE.S280280. eCollection 2021.
To evaluate the effects of the type of ceramic, and the influence of the type of cervical substrate on the microleakage of aged Porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs).
A total of 48 sound human maxillary premolars were divided randomly into two groups (n=24), Group A: lithium disilicate PLVs; Group B: zirconia reinforced lithium silicate PLVs. The groups were further subdivided into four subgroups (n=12): (A1, B1): finishing line placed in Class V composite filling; (A2, B2): finishing line placed in sound enamel. In subgroups A1 and B1 standardized Class V cavities were prepared and restored with nanocomposite. Standardized PLVs tooth preparation was done for the specimens in all subgroups. Cementation of PLVs was done with a light cured resin cement and specimens were stored in distilled water for 2 weeks. Mechanical load cycling (45,000 cycle, 49 N at 2.5 Hz) and thermocycling procedure (500 cycles, 5-55°C) were done. A microleakage test was done with dye penetration (2% methylene blue) and the microleakage percentage was recorded and calculated using a stereomicroscope and ImageJ program.
Means of microleakage percentage of the subgroups were: A1 (6.6075%), A2 (4.6058%), B1 (7.3158%), and B2 (6.105%), Two-way ANOVA showed a significant effect of ceramic type and cervical composite substrate. According to samples -test, subgroup A2 was significantly lower than A1 and B2, while subgroup B2 was significantly lower than B1. A -value≤0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
The type of ceramic and the type of substrate both affects PLV microleakage. Lithium disilicate PLVs had significantly lower microleakage compared to zirconia reinforced lithium silicate PLVs. Teeth with cervical composite substrate had a significantly higher microleakage compared to teeth with enamel substrate.
评估陶瓷类型以及颈部基底类型对老化瓷贴面（PLV）微渗漏的影响。
将48颗健康人上颌前磨牙随机分为两组（n = 24），A组：二硅酸锂PLV；B组：氧化锆增强硅酸锂PLV。每组再进一步细分为四个亚组（n = 12）：（A1、B1）：边缘线置于V类复合树脂充填体；（A2、B2）：边缘线置于健康牙釉质。在A1和B1亚组中制备标准化的V类洞并用纳米复合树脂修复。对所有亚组的标本进行标准化的PLV牙体预备。用光固化树脂水门汀粘结PLV，标本在蒸馏水中保存2周。进行机械载荷循环（45,000次循环，2.5Hz下49N）和热循环程序（500次循环，5 - 55°C）。用染料渗透法（2%亚甲蓝）进行微渗漏测试，使用体视显微镜和ImageJ程序记录并计算微渗漏百分比。
各亚组微渗漏百分比均值分别为：A1（6.6075%）、A2（4.6058%）、B1（7.3158%）和B2（6.105%），双向方差分析显示陶瓷类型和颈部复合基底有显著影响。根据样本检验，A2亚组显著低于A1和B2，而B2亚组显著低于B1。P值≤0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
陶瓷类型和基底类型均影响PLV微渗漏。与氧化锆增强硅酸锂PLV相比，二硅酸锂PLV的微渗漏显著更低。与牙釉质基底的牙齿相比，颈部有复合基底的牙齿微渗漏显著更高。
