五种牙本质粘结系统微拉伸强度的比较  

Comparison of microtensile bonding strength of total-etch and self-etch adhesives

作　　者：郭彤[1] 陈吉华[1] 方明[1] 

机构地区：[1]第四军医大学口腔医学院修复科,西安710032

出　　处：《北京口腔医学》2010年第4期196-198,共3页Beijing Journal of Stomatology

摘　　要：目的比较不同类型自酸蚀牙本质粘结系统的粘结强度,为临床应用提供参考。方法选择4种自酸蚀粘结系统Clearfil S3Bond,i Bond,Clearfil SE Bond,XenoⅢ,1种全酸蚀粘结系统Single Bond2,用微拉伸法测试这些粘结系统的粘结强度并进行比较。结果全酸蚀粘结剂Single Bond2的微拉伸强度最高,与自酸蚀粘结剂粘结强度有显著差异(P<0.05)。自酸蚀粘结剂i Bond,S3Bond,XenoⅢ两两之间粘结强度无显著差异(P>0.05)。SE Bond的粘结强度显著高于i Bond,S3Bond和XenoⅢ(P<0.05)。结论第五代牙本质粘结剂具有较强的粘结强度,但第七代牙本质粘结剂临床操作更为方便。Objective To investigate the microtensile bond strength （μTBS） of four self-etching adhesive systems and a total-etch adhesive system. Methods The occlusal enamel of fifty human molars were removed to expose the dentin surfaces. Resin-dentin bonded specimens were obtained with four self-etching adhesive systems, Clearfil S3 Bond, i Bond, Clearfil SE Bond, Xeno Ⅲ, and a Single Bond 2 of total-etch adhesive system, respectively. Each specimen was then sectioned perpendicularly through the adhesive interface and the μTBS was tested. The data were statistically analyzed. Results The total-etch adhesive had the highest microtensile bond strength, compared with the four self-etch adhesives （ P 〈 0. 05 ）. There were no significant differences in the microtensile bonding strength among the three self-etch adhesive ： i Bond, S3 Bond, Xeno Ⅲ （ P 〉 0. 05 ） , but the microtensile bonding strength of SE Bond was higher than those of other three self-etch adhesives （ P 〈 0. 05 ）. Condusion The fifth generation of the adhesives has highest microtensile bonding strength but the seventh generation of the adhesives is more user friendly.

关 键 词：粘结 牙本质 微拉伸强度测试 

分 类 号：R783.3[医药卫生—口腔医学]