大体积光固化复合树脂固化深度和显微硬度的比较研究  

Evaluations of depth of cure and microhardness for 3 kinds of bulk fill dental resin-composites

作　　者：王献刚[1] 袁清敏 郝志红[1] 冯保静[1] 

机构地区：[1]安阳市第六人民医院口腔修复科,河南安阳455000

出　　处：《临床口腔医学杂志》2015年第10期590-591,共2页Journal of Clinical Stomatology

摘　　要：目的:比较Tetric EvoCeram、Venus和Filtek3种光固化复合树脂大体积充填的固化深度和显微硬度。方法:根据ISO4049-2000标准测量3种复合树脂的固化深度,并使用维氏显微硬度仪测量其显微硬度。测试结果用单因素方差分析和Tukey post hoc HSD进行分析。结果:3种复合树脂大体积充填的固化深度之间没有显著差异,且均大于4 mm。但表面维氏硬度之间三者均有显著差异(P<0.05),从大到小依次为:Tetric EvoCeram组>Filtek组>Venus组。结论:综合两方面指标,Tetric EvoCeram树脂机械性能较高。Objective： To determine the post-cure depth of cure and Vickers microhardness of 3 kinds of bulk fill resin composites through using Vickers hardness. Method： 3 bulk fill composite materials were examined： Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Venus Bulk Fill, and FiltekTM Bulk Fill. According to ISO 4049～2000, the post-cure depths of cure for 3 com- posite materials were evaluated. The Vickers hardness was also measured by Vicker＇s hardness gauge. Data were analysed by one-way ANOVA using Tukey post hoc tests （α=0.05）. Result： There were no statistically significant differences on the depths of cure for 3 composite materials which were all above 4 mm, complying with manufacturers＇ claim. There were sta- tistically significant differences on the Vickers microhardness for composite materials,the order as follows： Tetric EvoCeram 〉 Filtek 〉 Venus. Conclusion： The mechanical properties of Tetric EvoCeram are higher, and we should choose materials with different mechanical properties in the clinical operation according to clinical need.

关 键 词：固化深度 显微硬度 大体积充填 

分 类 号：R781.05[医药卫生—口腔医学]