Suppr超能文献

不同修复系统和老化对深近中边缘树脂复合材料边缘适应性的影响。

Effect of different restorative systems and aging on marginal adaptation of resin composites to deep proximal margins.

机构信息

Operative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.

出版信息

J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024 Feb;36(2):346-355. doi: 10.1111/jerd.13116. Epub 2023 Jul 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the marginal integrity of different restorative systems bonded to proximal gingival dentin, and determine the consistency level of the results obtained by two in vitro methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty molars received occluso-mesial preparations with dentin/cementum gingival margins. They were divided into three groups and restored using different restorative systems with light-cured (Adhese Universal), self-cured (Palfique universal bond), and dual-cured (Futurabond U) adhesives. The restoration/gingival dentin interfaces were observed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and evaluated based on the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. After 10,000 thermal cycles, the marginal integrity was re-evaluated. Marginal integrity was evaluated by the percentage of continuous margin (% CM) at ×200 for SEM and as the frequency of each score within the FDI ranking.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the restorative systems immediately, however, the system with the light-cured adhesive had the lowest marginal integrity after aging. All tested restorative systems were adversely affected by aging. A moderate inverse correlation was identified between evaluation techniques.

CONCLUSION

The tested restorative systems utilizing self-cured and dual-cured adhesives may be preferable for achieving optimal marginal integrity when bonding to deep proximal margins, compared to the tested system with light-cured adhesive.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

When performing deep margin elevation, it is important to consider the adhesive system being used.

摘要

目的

评估和比较不同修复系统与近龈牙本质结合的边缘完整性,并确定两种体外方法获得的结果的一致性水平。

材料和方法

30 颗磨牙进行了颊舌向近中牙体预备,有龈/牙骨质边缘。它们被分为三组,分别使用不同的修复系统进行修复,包括光固化(Adhese Universal)、自固化(Palfique universal bond)和双固化(Futurabond U)黏合剂。使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察修复/牙本质-龈界面,并根据世界牙科联合会(FDI)标准进行评估。经过 10000 次热循环后,重新评估边缘完整性。通过 SEM 下的连续边缘百分比(%CM)在×200 下评估边缘完整性,以及 FDI 分级内每个评分的频率。

结果

即刻时,修复系统之间没有发现显著差异,但光固化黏合剂的系统在老化后边缘完整性最低。所有测试的修复系统都受到了老化的不利影响。鉴定出评估技术之间存在中度反向相关性。

结论

与测试的光固化黏合剂系统相比,在与深近龈边缘结合时,使用自固化和双固化黏合剂的测试修复系统可能更有利于获得最佳的边缘完整性。

临床意义

在进行深边缘提升时,重要的是要考虑所使用的黏合剂系统。

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