4种材料粘结聚合瓷嵌体的性能对比研究  

Comparison of bond performance between Ceramage polymerization ceramic inlay and four bonding materials

作　　者：沈宝莲 邓久鹏 王继德 尹浩月 马丽娟 SHEN Bao-lian;DENG Jiu-peng;WANG Ji-de;YIN Hao-yue;MA Li-juan(College of stomatology,North China University of Science and Technology,Tangshan 063000,Chin)

机构地区：[1]华北理工大学口腔医学院,河北唐山063000

出　　处：《牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志》2018年第7期395-399,共5页Chinese Journal of Conservative Dentistry

摘　　要：目的:比较牙本质树脂(UD1)、自固化树脂水门汀(Super-Bond C&B)、光固化树脂水门汀(Variolink N)和双固化树脂水门汀(PULPDENT Embrace)粘结聚合瓷嵌体后,剪切粘结强度和微渗漏情况。方法:微渗漏实验:选择44个前磨牙,在颊面制备长、宽、深分别为5、3、2 mm的洞型后,随机分为A1、B1、C1、D1 4组(n=11),分别用牙本质树脂UD1(A1)、Super-Bond C&B(B1)、Variolink N(C1),PULPDENT Embrace(D1)4种材料与Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体进行粘结。经过500次冷热水浴循环后,体视显微镜观测甲基蓝渗透深度。剪切粘结强度实验:另选择40个前磨牙,暴露牙本质面后随机分为A2、B2、C2、D2 4组(n=10),分别用A1、B1、C1、D1相同的粘结材料与高3 mm、直径3 mm聚合瓷试件粘结后,测试剪切粘结强度。结果:4组粘结材料牙合方微渗漏值由大到小依次为C1>B1、A1>D1,其中D1组、C1组与其他各组两两比较均有显著差异(P<0.05),而A1组与B1组间无统计学差异(P>0.05);龈方微渗漏值D1<A1、B1、C1组(P<0.05),其中A1、B1、C1组间两两比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。剪切粘结强度比较D2组最大,其余3组组间两两比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:牙本质树脂UD1、Super-Bond C&B、Variolink N和PULPDENT Embrace均具有较好的粘结强度,其中双固化树脂水门汀粘结材料PULPDENT Embrace的边缘封闭性和剪切粘结强度均高于其他3种。AIM： To study the bond performance between Ceramage polymerization ceramic inlay and four bonding materials. METHODS： Microleakage experiment： 44 intact premolars with artificial Ⅴcavity were divided into 4 groups （ n =11） Ceramage polymerization ceramic inlays were cemented into the cavities of the teeth respectively by EHR UD1 （group A1）, Super-Bond C＆B （group B1）, Variolink N （group C1） and PULPDENT Embrace （group D1） respectively. The teeth after 500 circled fatigue experiment were stained by methylthioninium chloride. The inlays were cut and dye penetration was examined under microscope. Shear bond strength test： 40 ceramage polymerization ceramic columniform specimens with the diameter of 3 mm and the thickness of 3 mm were made. 40 premolars were divided into A2,B2,C2 and D2 groups and the interfaces of the exposing dentin were bonded with inlays respectively by EHR UD1,Super-Bond C＆B,Variolink N and PULPDENT Embrace. Finally Shear bond strength test was conducted. The morphology of fractured interface was observed by stereomicroscope. RESULTS： AT occlusal margin,the microleakage of group D1 was significantly lower than that of the other 3 groups, that of group A1 and B1 was significantly lower than that of group C1,between A1 and B1 （P〉0.05）. At gingival margin, the microleakage of group D1 was significantly lower than that of other three groups, and there was no significant difference among the other 3 groups（ P 〉0.05）. The shear bond strength of Group D2 was the highest（ P 〈0.05 ）. And there was no significant difference among the other 3 groups（ P 〉0.05）. CONCLUSION： The shear bond strength of EHR UD1,Super-Bond C＆B, Variolink N and PULPDENT Embrace can meet the clinical requirements after cemented with Ceramage polymerization ceramic inlay. PULPDENT Embrace has the strongest shear bond strength and the least margin microleakage.

关 键 词：树脂水门汀 嵌体 微渗漏 剪切粘结强度 

分 类 号：R783.1[医药卫生—口腔医学]