修复方案和咀嚼模拟对两种树脂基质陶瓷与复合树脂的微拉伸粘结强度的影响。

The effect of repair protocols and chewing simulation on the microtensile bond strength of two resin matrix ceramics to composite resin.

机构信息

Department of dental biomaterials, dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.

出版信息

BMC Oral Health. 2024 Feb 2;24(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-03932-4.

DOI:10.1186/s12903-024-03932-4

PMID:38308281

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10837933/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To assess the micro tensile bond strength (µTBS) of two resin matrix ceramic (RMC) blocks bonded to composite resin by using different repair protocols with and without chewing simulation (CS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two resin matrix ceramic blocks (Vita Enamic and Lava Ultimate) were divided into 4 groups according to the surface treatments: Bur grinding (control), Bur grinding + silane, 9.5% HF acid etching, and 9.5% HF acid etching + silane. The single bond universal adhesive was applied on all specimens after the surface treatments according to the manufacturer's instructions, it was administered actively on the treated surface for 20 s and then light cured for 10 s, followed by incremental packing of composite resin to the treated surface. Each group was further divided into 2 subgroups (with/without chewing simulation for 500,000 cycles). A micro tensile bond strength test was performed for each group (n = 15). The effect of surface treatments on the materials was examined by using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The micro tensile bond strength (MPa) data were analyzed with a three-way ANOVA, the independent t-test, and one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey post-hoc test.

RESULTS

µTBS results were significantly higher for Lava Ultimate than Vita Enamic for all the surface treatment protocols with (p < 0.01). The chewing simulation significantly negatively affected the micro-tensile bond strength (p < 0.001). Bur grinding + saline exhibited the highest bond strength values for Lava Ultimate, both with and without chewing simulation. For Vita Enamic, bur grinding + saline and HF acid + saline showed significantly higher bond strength values compared to other surface treatments, both with and without chewing simulation (p ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Bur grinding + silane could be recommended as a durable repair protocol for indirect resin matrix ceramics blocks with composite resin material.

摘要

背景

评估两种树脂基质陶瓷（RMC）块与复合树脂的微拉伸粘结强度（µTBS），使用不同的修复方案，包括有和无咀嚼模拟（CS）。

材料和方法

根据表面处理，将两种树脂基质陶瓷块（Vita Enamic 和 Lava Ultimate）分为 4 组：轮磨（对照）、轮磨+硅烷、9.5%氢氟酸蚀刻、9.5%氢氟酸蚀刻+硅烷。根据制造商的说明，在所有试件的表面处理后应用单键通用胶粘剂，在处理过的表面上主动涂抹 20 秒，然后光固化 10 秒，然后在处理过的表面上逐步填充复合树脂。每组进一步分为 2 个亚组（有/无咀嚼模拟 50 万次）。对每组进行微拉伸粘结强度测试（n=15）。用扫描电子显微镜（SEM）检查表面处理对材料的影响。使用三因素方差分析、独立 t 检验和单向方差分析，随后进行 Tukey 事后检验分析微拉伸粘结强度（MPa）数据。

结果

对于所有表面处理方案，Lava Ultimate 的µTBS 结果均显著高于 Vita Enamic（p<0.01）。咀嚼模拟显著降低微拉伸粘结强度（p<0.001）。轮磨+盐水对 Lava Ultimate 的粘结强度值最高，无论是否有咀嚼模拟。对于 Vita Enamic，轮磨+盐水和 HF 酸+盐水与其他表面处理相比，无论是否有咀嚼模拟，均显示出更高的粘结强度值（p≤0.05）。