牙本质粘接剂对窝洞充填效果影响的实验研究  

Effects of dentin bonding agents on cavity filling in vitro

作　　者：杨清岭[1] 曹婷婷[1] 陈建国[2] 

机构地区：[1]佳木斯大学附属口腔医院,黑龙江佳木斯154004 [2]济宁口腔医院,山东济宁272000

出　　处：《黑龙江医药科学》2007年第3期33-34,共2页Heilongjiang Medicine and Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的:研究不同牙本质粘接剂对窝洞充填后封闭性效果的影响。方法:40颗离体牙随机平分为4组,颊、舌侧制备盒状洞,分别涂Prime&Bond NT、XenoⅢ、釉质粘结剂后,充填Charisma树脂,剩余一组酸蚀后直接进行树脂充填,经温差循环和染料渗透实验后,体视显微镜下观察微渗漏情况。结果:4组中除Prime&Bond NT组和釉质粘接剂组间差异无显著性(P>0.05)外,其余组两两结果比较均具有显著性意义(P<0.05),其中对照组与各实验组间差异也具有高度显著性意义(P>0.01)。结论:Prime&Bond NT较XenoⅢ具有较好的边缘封闭性。Objective： To compare marginal seal abilities of the different dentin bonding agents. Methods： Forty isolated teeth were randomly divided into three experiment groups （Prime ＆. Bond NTgroup, Xeno Ⅱ group and enamel agent group） and contrast group. The buccal box cavity and lingual box cavity were prepared respectively,bonding agents Prime ＆. Bond NT, Xeno Ⅱ and enamel agent were smeared on the box cavities of the three experiment groups respectively and then filled with Charisma resin. After thermal cycling and dye penetration test,all teeth were cut at the labial-lingal direction and observed under a stereoscopic microscope. Results：There was significant statistical difference between the experiment groups and the contrast group （P 〈 0.01） ,The difference between Prime ＆.Bond NT group and Xeno Ⅱ group was significant （P 〈 0.05） ,but there was no difference between in the Prime＆Bond NT group and the enamel agent group （P〉 0.05） . Conclusion：Prime＆.Bond NT has better marginal seal ability than Xeno Ⅱ.

关 键 词：牙本质粘接剂 窝洞充填 密合性 

分 类 号：R781.05[医药卫生—口腔医学]