不同抛光工具对CEREC Blocs陶瓷抛光效果的比较研究  

Polishing performance of different polishing tools for CEREC Blocs ceramic

作　　者：王桃[1] 郭震威 郭慧晶 乔翔鹤 

机构地区：[1]郑州大学第一附属医院修复科 [2]郑州大学第一附属医院牙体牙髓病科,郑州450052 [3]口腔疾病研究国家重点实验室,国家口腔疾病临床研究中心,四川大学华西口腔医院头颈肿瘤外科,成都610041

出　　处：《华西口腔医学杂志》2017年第2期171-175,共5页West China Journal of Stomatology

摘　　要：目的比较临床常用的几种玻璃陶瓷抛光工具对CEREC Blocs陶瓷的抛光效果,为临床抛光工具的选择提供依据。方法制作60个陶瓷试件,随机分为6组(n=10),进行不同的表面处理。G组:釉膏上釉;SF组:使用松风Porcelain Adjustment Kit+Cera Master组合抛光;3M组:使用3M Sof-LexTM Discs套装抛光;Tob组:使用道邦玻璃陶瓷套装抛光;EVE组:使用EVE DIAPRO套装抛光;Ivo组:使用义获嘉伟瓦登特Optra Fine?套装抛光。测量各组试件表面粗糙度值Ra、Rz并作统计分析,通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观测试件并对其表面形态作定性分析。结果 G、3M、SF、Ivo、EVE、Tob组的抛光后Ra值分别为(0.069±0.008)、(0.073±0.009)、(0.223±0.025)、(0.229±0.022)、(0.491±0.093)、(0.763±0.067)μm,经统计学分析,Ra值从小到大依次为G和3M组<SF和Ivo组<EVE组<Tob组,其中G组与3M组、SF组与Ivo组的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),其余各组间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Rz值统计结果与Ra值一致。SEM观察结果与粗糙度值的统计结果一致。结论不同抛光工具对CEREC Blocs陶瓷的抛光效果不同,本实验条件下,Sof-LexTM Discs套装抛光表面最光滑,效果近似釉膏上釉。Objective This study aimed to compare the polishing performance of five different glass-ceramic polishing tools on CEREC Blocs ceramic and provide evidence for clinical polishing tool selection. Methods Sixty ceramic specimens were prepared and divided into six groups （n=10）. These specimens received different surface treatments, including glazing （group G）, polishing with Shofu polishing set, that is, Porcelain Adjustment Kit＋CeraMaster （group SF）, 3M Sof-Lex^TM Discs （group 3M）, TobooM polishing set （group Tob）, EVE DIAPRO system （group EVE）, and Ivoclar Vivadent OptraFine？ system （group Ivo）. Polishing quality was measured with a profilometer, and we selected Ra and Rz values for statistical analysis. Qualitative surface evaluation was performed by a scanning electron microscope （SEM）. Results The mean Ra values of each group were as follows： G （0.069 μm±0.008 μm）〈3M （0.073 μm±0.009 μm）〈SF （0.223 μm±0.025 μm）〈Ivo （0.229 μm±0.022 μm）〈EVE （0.491 μm±0.093 μm）〈Tob （0.763 μm±0.067 μm）. No significant difference was observed between G and 3M groups （P〉0.05）, and SF and Ivo groups （P〉0.05）, but the remaining treatment groups were significantly different from each other （P〈0.05）. Statistical Results of Rz values were the same as the Ra values, and visual analysis of the images obtained from SEM was consistent with the statistical Results. Conclusion The polishing performance of different polishing tools for CEREC Blocs ceramic was different. Sof-Lex^TM Discs achieved the most remarkable performance, which was comparable to that of glazing.

关 键 词：CEREC Blocs陶瓷 抛光 上釉 表面粗糙度 

分 类 号：R783.1[医药卫生—口腔医学]