复合树脂间粘接的微拉伸强度研究  

Microtensile strength of composite-composite bonding: an in vitro study

作　　者：林斐[1] 刘伟[2] 闫鹏[3] 岳林[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学口腔医学院.口腔医院牙体牙髓科,北京100081 [2]北京大学第三医院口腔科,北京100191 [3]天津市口腔医院牙体牙髓二科,天津200041

出　　处：《北京大学学报（医学版）》2015年第1期124-128,共5页Journal of Peking University:Health Sciences

摘　　要：目的:了解不同复合树脂间粘接后的强度。方法:选用甲基丙烯酸基复合树脂Clearfil APX(APX)及其配套粘接剂Clearfil SE Bond(SE)和环氧基复合树脂Filtek P90(P90)及其配套粘接剂Filtek P90 System Adhesive(SA)。实验分为3组:(1)整块组,将树脂分层固化制成完整一体的树脂块;(2)直接充填组,将树脂固化成块后,表面打磨,再直接填充新树脂,光固化;(3)粘接组,树脂固化成块后打磨,涂布粘接剂,再填充新树脂,光固化。将上述树脂试样切成数条1 mm×1 mm×14 mm的样品,检测微拉伸强度,以One-Way ANOVA和LSD法对数据进行统计分析。结果:(1)整块组的微拉伸强度最高,APX为(81.11±1.79)MPa,P90为(82.07±1.42)MPa,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(2)直接充填组中,APX-APX为(43.54±2.99)MPa,P90-APX为(42.74±2.49)MPa,APX-P90为(41.28±1.96)MPa,P90-P90为(42.39±3.24)MPa,各亚组间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(3)粘接组中,比较上层树脂的种类显示,用APX修复的微拉伸强度均显著高于用P90修复;比较底层树脂的种类显示,当上层树脂粘接相同种类的底层树脂时,其微拉伸强度要高于其对异种树脂的粘接(P<0.05);比较粘接剂的种类系显示,用SE粘接两树脂的微拉伸强度均显著高于用SA粘接。(4)微拉伸强度排序为:整块>SE粘接APX>SA粘接APX>SE粘接P90=直接充填>SA粘接P90。结论:底层树脂表面经打磨后,使用APX粘接修复的强度高于使用P90修复,SE粘接两树脂的强度高于SA,底层树脂的类型对粘接强度影响不大。Objective： To investigate the bonding strength of different resin composites. Methods：Methacrylate-based resin APX and silorane-based resin composite P90 were chosen in this study,with their corresponding adhesives Clearfil SE Bond（ SE） and Filtek P90 System Adhesive（ SA）. The specimens were divided into three groups：（ 1） bulk group,filling each block with the same composite,then curing;（ 2） direct filling group,curing and polishing one composite,then filling a new composite directly;（ 3） bonding group,after curing and polishing one composite,conditioning the surface with adhesives,then filling a new composite. Cut each resin blocks into 1 mm × 1 mm × 14 mm each piece,detecting the microtensile strength,and analyzing by One-Way ANOVA and LSD. Results：（ 1） The microtensile strength of the bulk group was the highest.（ 2） In direct filling group,the microtensile strength of4 subgroups showed no statistical significance with each other but lower than that of the bulk group.（ 3）In bonding group,the microtensile strength of repairing with APX was higher than that with P90. When repairing with same composite,the microtensile strength was higher if the resin type of substrates was same with restorations than that was different. The microtensile strength of adhesives SE was higher than that of SA.（ 4） The sorting of the microtensile strength： bulk SE bonding APX SA bonding APX SE bonding P90 = direct filling SA bonding P90. Conclusion： Retention force is higher when substrates are repaired with methacrylate-based resins and corresponding adhesives. Retention force is lower when repaired with silorane-based composites and corresponding adhesives. Types of the substrate composites show no influence on the bonding strength.

关 键 词：复合树脂类 牙黏合 牙应力分析 

分 类 号：R783.1[医药卫生—口腔医学]