Division of Cariology and Endodontology, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Division of Cariology and Endodontology, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.,
Am J Dent. 2024 Feb;37(1):29-34.
To compare the in vitro effect of laser and bur preparation on marginal adaptation of Class V cavities restored with a 2-step self-etch and distinct universal one-component universal adhesives used in self-etching mode.
96 Class V cavities were prepared with conventional burs or with an Er:YAG laser. Four universal self-etch (Unibond Extra Low Shrinkage, All Bond Universal, SKB-100 and Prime&Bond active) and a 2-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) that served as control were used to restore the cavities with direct composite. The percentages of continuous margins were evaluated by quantitative SEM analysis before and after a fatigue test consisting of 240,000 occlusal loads and 600 warm/cold thermal cycles.
The marginal adaptation of bur prepared restorations was statistically superior to laser-prepared ones. Class V cavities restored with Clearfil SE Bond and the one-component self-etching universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active presented the highest and statistically similar percentages of continuous margins before and after loading under both bur and laser cavity preparation. The lowest percentages of continuous margins were observed in the groups restored with the low shrinking adhesive (Unibond ELS), with medians of 49 and 21 for bur and laser prepared cavities after loading.
Class V cavities presented smoother and higher percentages of continuous margins when prepared by bur rather than by laser. The 2-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond and 1-step self-etch universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active showed a comparable marginal performance.
比较激光和车针预备对使用两步自酸蚀和通用单组分自酸蚀黏结剂在自酸蚀模式下修复的Ⅴ类洞边缘适合性的体外影响。
用传统车针或铒激光（Er:YAG）制备 96 个Ⅴ类洞。使用 4 种通用自酸蚀黏结剂（Unibond Extra Low Shrinkage、All Bond Universal、SKB-100 和 Prime&Bond active）和一种两步自酸蚀黏结剂（Clearfil SE Bond）作为对照来直接用复合树脂修复这些窝洞。在疲劳试验（240,000 次牙合向负载和 600 次冷热循环）前后，通过定量扫描电镜分析评估连续边缘的百分率。
车针预备修复体的边缘适合性在统计学上优于激光预备修复体。在用 Clearfil SE Bond 以及单组分自酸蚀通用黏结剂 All Bond Universal 和 Prime&Bond active 修复的窝洞中，在牙合面负载和激光预备窝洞预备前后，其连续边缘的百分率最高，且统计学上相似。在用低收缩黏结剂（Unibond ELS）修复的组中，连续边缘的百分率最低，牙合面负载后车针和激光预备窝洞的中位数分别为 49%和 21%。
与激光相比，用车针预备Ⅴ类洞时边缘更光滑，连续边缘的百分率更高。两步自酸蚀黏结剂 Clearfil SE Bond 和一步自酸蚀通用黏结剂 All Bond Universal 和 Prime&Bond active 的边缘性能相当。
