Schröter Franz-Josef, Ilie Nicoleta
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Goethestr. 70, D-80336 Munich, Germany.
Materials (Basel). 2023 Aug 17;16(16):5667. doi: 10.3390/ma16165667.
To find an alternative that is closer to clinical reality in terms of cavity geometry and configuration factor, this study investigated the pushout test on in vitro adhesive testing to coronal dentin when compared to the established shear test, both in a standardized approach. For a feasible comparison between both tests, the pushout specimen was adjusted in thickness (1.03 ± 0.05 mm) and cavity diameter (1.42 ± 0.03 mm) to receive a bonding area (4.63 ± 0.26 mm) that matches that of the shear test (4.57 ± 0.13 mm). Though, the configuration factor between both tests differs largely (pushout 1.5 ± 0.08; shear bond 0.20 ± 0.01). The bond strength of five different adhesives (n = 20) was investigated for both tests. The pushout test registered a high number of invalid measurements (30%) due to concomitant dentin fracture during testing. In contrast to the shear test, the pushout test failed to discriminate between different adhesives ( = 0.367). Both tests differed largely from each other when comparing adhesive groups. When solely looking at the valid specimens, Weibull modulus reached higher values in the pushout approach. Conclusively, the pushout test in this specific setup does not distinguish as precisely as the shear bond test between different adhesives and needs adaption to be routinely applied in adhesive dentistry.
为了在窝洞几何形状和构型因子方面找到更接近临床实际的替代方法,本研究采用标准化方法,对体外牙冠牙本质粘结测试中的推出试验与既定的剪切试验进行了研究。为了在两种试验之间进行可行的比较,对推出试验样本的厚度(1.03±0.05mm)和窝洞直径(1.42±0.03mm)进行了调整,使其粘结面积(4.63±0.26mm)与剪切试验的粘结面积(4.57±0.13mm)相匹配。然而,两种试验的构型因子差异很大(推出试验为1.5±0.08;剪切粘结试验为0.20±0.01)。对五种不同粘结剂(n=20)进行了两种试验的粘结强度研究。推出试验记录了大量无效测量值(30%),原因是测试过程中伴有牙本质骨折。与剪切试验不同,推出试验未能区分不同的粘结剂(=0.367)。在比较粘结剂组时,两种试验彼此差异很大。仅看有效样本时,推出试验方法中的威布尔模量值更高。总之,在这种特定设置下的推出试验在区分不同粘结剂方面不如剪切粘结试验精确,需要进行调整才能在粘结牙科中常规应用。