Suppr超能文献

大体积充填树脂复合材料的修复潜力:不同表面处理方案的影响。

Repair potential of a bulk-fill resin composite: Effect of different surface-treatment protocols.

机构信息

Restorative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Eur J Oral Sci. 2021 Dec;129(6):e12814. doi: 10.1111/eos.12814. Epub 2021 Jul 26.

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of different surface-treatment protocols on the repair bond strength of a bulk-fill resin composite. One-hundred and forty specimens (Filtek Bulk-fill) were created (5 mm diameter, 4 mm depth) and allocated to one of 14 groups according to surface treatment (no treatment, tribochemical silica coating, sandblasting with aluminum oxide), adhesive application (no adhesive, total-etch, self-etch), and type of repair resin (bulk-fill, universal resin) (n = 10 per group). Twenty specimens were selected for measuring the cohesive strengths of non-aged resin composites and used as reference. Other specimens were thermocycled. Shear bond-strength testing was performed. Data were analyzed using linear regression of bond strength as a function of the surface treatment, type of adhesive and whether or not adhesive was applied, and type of repair resin. The failure modes were analyzed using logistic regression of failure mode (cohesive failure vs. other types, or adhesive failure vs. other types) on the type of surface treatment, adhesive application, and repair resin used. Surface treatment, regardless of whether this was tribochemical silica coating (mean difference = 5.44 MPa; 95% CI = 4.77-6.11) or sandblasting with aluminum oxide (mean difference = 4.22 MPa; 95% CI = 3.55-4.88), resulted in higher shear bond strength than no treatment. Application of adhesive resulted in a substantial and statistically significant decrease of shear bond strength (by 8.77 MPa, for self-etch and by 7.26 MPa for total-etch) relative to no adhesive. Conversely, the type of repair resin did not influence the shear bond strength to any appreciable extent.

摘要

本研究评估了不同表面处理方案对块状填充树脂复合材料修复粘结强度的影响。制备了 140 个试件(Filtek Bulk-fill)(直径 5mm,深度 4mm),并根据表面处理(无处理、化学机械硅涂层、氧化铝喷砂)、粘结剂应用(无粘结剂、全酸蚀、自酸蚀)和修复树脂类型(块状填充、通用树脂)将其分为 14 组(每组 n=10)。选择 20 个试件测量未老化树脂复合材料的内聚强度,并用作参考。其余试件进行热循环。进行剪切粘结强度测试。使用线性回归分析粘结强度作为表面处理、粘结剂类型以及是否应用粘结剂的函数,以及修复树脂类型的数据。使用逻辑回归分析失效模式(内聚失效与其他类型,或粘结失效与其他类型)与表面处理类型、粘结剂应用和使用的修复树脂之间的关系来分析失效模式。无论采用化学机械硅涂层(平均差异=5.44MPa;95%置信区间=4.77-6.11)还是氧化铝喷砂(平均差异=4.22MPa;95%置信区间=3.55-4.88),表面处理均导致剪切粘结强度显著提高,优于无处理。应用粘结剂会导致剪切粘结强度显著下降(自酸蚀下降 8.77MPa,全酸蚀下降 7.26MPa),与无粘结剂相比。相反,修复树脂的类型并没有对剪切粘结强度产生明显的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验