Strang R, Cummings A, Stephen K W, McMenemy P
J Oral Rehabil. 1986 May;13(3):257-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1986.tb00657.x.
As part of a laboratory evaluation, measurements of abrasion loss and tensile enamel--sealant bond strengths have been made on three visible light cured sealants (two filled, one unfilled), two chemically cured sealants (one filled and one unfilled) and an experimental sealant with alumina filler particles. A UV-cured filled sealant was used as a control. The unfilled sealants had abrasion loss approximately twice that of the filled commercial sealants. The experimental sealant, with filler content above 50%, had an abrasion loss approximately half that of the filled commercial sealants. The chemical cured sealants had bond strengths lower than the UV-cured control, while the bond strengths of the two visible light-cured filled sealants and the experimental sealant were not statistically different from either the unfilled visible light-cured sealant or from the UV-cured filled sealant.
作为实验室评估的一部分，已对三种可见光固化密封剂（两种填充型、一种未填充型）、两种化学固化密封剂（一种填充型和一种未填充型）以及一种含氧化铝填料颗粒的实验性密封剂进行了磨损损失和牙釉质 - 密封剂拉伸粘结强度的测量。一种紫外线固化填充密封剂用作对照。未填充密封剂的磨损损失约为填充型商业密封剂的两倍。填料含量高于50%的实验性密封剂，其磨损损失约为填充型商业密封剂的一半。化学固化密封剂的粘结强度低于紫外线固化对照，而两种可见光固化填充密封剂和实验性密封剂的粘结强度与未填充可见光固化密封剂或紫外线固化填充密封剂相比，在统计学上没有差异。
