Suppr超能文献

粘结方案对应用于CAD-CAM复合材料的粘结剂性能的影响。

Effect of Bonding Protocols on the Performance of Luting Agents Applied to CAD-CAM Composites.

作者信息

Hilgemberg Bruna, Siqueira Fabiana Suelen Figuerêdo de, Cardenas Andres Felipe Millan, Ribeiro Josiane Loch, Dávila-Sánchez Andrés, Sauro Salvatore, Loguercio Alessandro Dourado, Arrais Cesar Augusto Galvao

机构信息

Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa 840030-900, Brazil.

Department of Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, CEUMA University, São Luis 65075-120, Brazil.

出版信息

Materials (Basel). 2022 Aug 31;15(17):6004. doi: 10.3390/ma15176004.

Abstract

This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of different bonding strategies on the micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) of luting agents to CAD−CAM composites. Surface scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and spectroscopy by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) were performed to analyze the surfaces of the composite before and after bonding treatment. Three CAD−CAM composites were evaluated: Lava Ultimate restorative (LU), Brava Blocks (BR), and Vita Enamic (VE). The LU and BR surfaces were sandblasted using aluminum oxide, while the VE surfaces were etched using a 5% hydrofluoric acid gel according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. All surfaces were subjected to the following bonding strategies (n = 15): adhesive with silane and MDP (ScotchBond Universal, 3M Oral Care, St Paul, MI, USA); adhesive with MDP (Ambar Universal, FGM, Joinville, Brazil); adhesive without silane or MDP (Prime&Bond Elect, Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA), pure silane without MDP (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil), and pure silane with MDP (Monobond N, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstei). Afterwards, tygons were filled with RelyX Ultimate (3M Oral Care), AllCem (FGM), or Enforce (Dentsply Sirona), which were light-cured and subjected to the μSBS test. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni’s post hoc test (α = 0.05). Additional blocks (n = 15) were subjected to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) before and after the surface treatment. The μSBS values on VE surfaces were higher than those observed on LU and BR surfaces (p < 0.001). Silane without MDP (Allcem) promoted the highest μSBS values, while silane with MDP (RelyX Ultimate) provided the highest values among all bonding strategies (p < 0.001). Enforce promoted no significant difference in μSBS values. SEM and EDS analyses detected noticeable changes to the surface morphology and composition after the surface treatment. The effectiveness of the bonding strategy may vary according not only to the CAD−CAM composite but also to resin cement/bonding agent/silane used.

摘要

本体外研究旨在评估不同粘结策略对粘结剂与计算机辅助设计与制造(CAD-CAM)复合材料之间微剪切粘结强度(μSBS)的影响。采用表面扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和能量色散X射线光谱(EDS)光谱分析粘结处理前后复合材料的表面。评估了三种CAD-CAM复合材料:Lava Ultimate修复材料(LU)、Brava Blocks(BR)和Vita Enamic(VE)。根据制造商的建议,LU和BR表面用氧化铝喷砂处理,而VE表面用5%氢氟酸凝胶蚀刻。所有表面均采用以下粘结策略(n = 15):含硅烷和10-甲基丙烯酰氧癸基二氢磷酸酯(MDP)的粘结剂(ScotchBond Universal,3M口腔护理产品,美国明尼苏达州圣保罗);含MDP的粘结剂(Ambar Universal,FGM,巴西茹安维尔);不含硅烷或MDP的粘结剂(Prime&Bond Elect,登士柏西诺德,美国北卡罗来纳州夏洛特)、不含MDP的纯硅烷(Angelus,巴西隆德里纳)和含MDP的纯硅烷(Monobond N,义获嘉伟瓦登特,列支敦士登沙恩)。之后,用RelyX Ultimate(3M口腔护理产品)、AllCem(FGM)或Enforce(登士柏西诺德)填充泰根管,进行光固化并进行μSBS测试。使用双向方差分析和Bonferroni事后检验(α = 0.05)分析数据。另外的试件(n = 15)在表面处理前后进行扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和能量色散X射线光谱(EDS)分析。VE表面的μSBS值高于LU和BR表面观察到的值(p < 0.001)。不含MDP的硅烷(Allcem)促进了最高的μSBS值,而含MDP的硅烷(RelyX Ultimate)在所有粘结策略中提供了最高值(p < 0.001)。Enforce在μSBS值上未促进显著差异。SEM和EDS分析检测到表面处理后表面形态和成分有明显变化。粘结策略的有效性不仅可能因CAD-CAM复合材料而异,还可能因所用的树脂水门汀/粘结剂/硅烷而异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c160/9457303/d9db4ea33df7/materials-15-06004-g001.jpg

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