Rodrigues Maykely Naara Morais, Bruno Kely Firmino, de Alencar Ana Helena Gonçalves, Silva Julyana Dumas Santos, de Siqueira Patrícia Correia, Decurcio Daniel de Almeida, Estrela Carlos
Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
Department of Endodontics, South American College, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
Restor Dent Endod. 2021 Nov 9;46(4):e59. doi: 10.5395/rde.2021.46.e59. eCollection 2021 Nov.
This study compared the Biodentine, MTA Repair HP, and Bio-C Repair bioceramics in terms of bond strength to dentin, failure mode, and compression.
Fifty-four slices obtained from the cervical third of 18 single-rooted human mandibular premolars were randomly distributed ( = 18). After insertion of the bioceramic materials, the push-out test was performed. The failure mode was analyzed using stereomicroscopy. Another set of cylindrically-shaped bioceramic samples ( = 10) was prepared for compressive strength testing. The normality of data distribution was analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests were used for the push-out test data, while compressive strength was analyzed with analysis of variance and the Tukey test, considering a significance level of 0.05.
Biodentine presented a higher median bond strength value (14.79 MPa) than MTA Repair HP (8.84 MPa) and Bio-C Repair (3.48 MPa), with a significant difference only between Biodentine and Bio-C Repair. In the Biodentine group, the most frequent failure mode was mixed (61%), while in the MTA Repair HP and Bio-C Repair groups, it was adhesive (94% and 72%, respectively). Biodentine showed greater resistance to compression (29.59 ± 8.47 MPa) than MTA Repair HP (18.68 ± 7.40 MPa) and Bio-C Repair (19.96 ± 3.96 MPa) ( < 0.05).
Biodentine showed greater compressive strength than MTA Repair HP and Bio-C Repair, and greater bond strength than Bio-C Repair. The most frequent failure mode of Biodentine was mixed, while that of MTA Repair HP and Bio-C Repair was adhesive.
本研究比较了生物陶瓷材料Biodentine、MTA Repair HP和Bio-C Repair在与牙本质的粘结强度、失效模式及抗压强度方面的差异。
从18颗单根人类下颌前磨牙的颈部三分之一处获取54片切片，随机分为3组（每组18片）。在植入生物陶瓷材料后，进行推出试验。使用体视显微镜分析失效模式。另外制备了一组圆柱形生物陶瓷样品（每组10个）用于抗压强度测试。使用Shapiro-Wilk检验分析数据分布的正态性。对于推出试验数据，采用Kruskal-Wallis和Friedman检验，而抗压强度则采用方差分析和Tukey检验进行分析，显著性水平设定为0.05。
Biodentine的中位粘结强度值（14.79MPa）高于MTA Repair HP（8.84MPa）和Bio-C Repair（3.48MPa），仅Biodentine与Bio-C Repair之间存在显著差异。在Biodentine组中，最常见的失效模式是混合模式（61%），而在MTA Repair HP和Bio-C Repair组中，失效模式为粘结模式（分别为94%和72%）。Biodentine显示出比MTA Repair HP（18.68±7.40MPa）和Bio-C Repair（19.96±3.96MPa）更强的抗压性（29.59±8.47MPa）（P<0.05）。
Biodentine的抗压强度高于MTA Repair HP和Bio-C Repair，粘结强度高于Bio-C Repair。Biodentine最常见的失效模式是混合模式，而MTA Repair HP和Bio-C Repair的失效模式是粘结模式。
