3种粘接剂分别粘接金属托槽至抛光及上釉锆瓷的粘接强度

目的:研究3种粘接剂对抛光及上釉锆瓷与正畸金属托槽粘接强度和耐久性的影响。方法:选用2种通用型粘接剂Single Bond Universal(SBU)和Prime&Bond Universal(PBU),以Transbond^TM MIP(TM)为对照分别将抛光组、上釉组锆瓷与上颌中切牙金属托槽粘接,试样共6组(n=20)。水浴或水浴+冷热循环储存后测试全部试件剪切粘接强度(SBS),分析断裂形态以及粘接剂残留指数(ARI)。结果:粘接剂(P<0.001)和储存条件(P<0.001)显著影响锆瓷与托槽的剪切粘接强度;抛光或上釉(P=0.09)组间无统计学差异。SBU在各组中都表现出较强的粘接强度和较低的ARI,3种粘接剂间的ARI分数存在显著差异(P<0.001)。结论:粘接金属托槽与抛光及上釉锆瓷时,SBU较PBU和TM有更好的粘接性能。     

人工唾液条件下3种自酸蚀粘接剂与牙本质粘接耐久性研究

目的　探讨Single bond™ Universal等3种不同类型自酸蚀粘接剂与牙本质的粘接强度和耐久性。方法　选取 2016年5—7月解放军总医院口腔颌面外科拔除的24颗新鲜人离体第三磨牙,随机分为3组,每组8颗,分别选用Clearfil SE Bond（SE组）、G-Bond plus（GBp组）、Single bond™ Universal（SBU组）等3种自酸蚀粘接剂与新鲜牙本质粘接并制备试件。每组挑选出完整试件160个,再分为两个亚组（各80个试件）,分别在即刻与人工唾液浸泡6个月后行微拉伸粘接强度实验,体视显微镜下观察试件断裂类型。 结果　SE组、GBp组、SBU组即刻牙本质粘接强度分别为（55.70 ± 11.07）、（52.85 ± 7.54）和（62.82 ± 8.70）MPa,其中SBU组高于SE组和GBp组,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。人工唾液保存6个月后,SE组、GBp组、SBU组牙本质粘接强度分别为（13.51 ± 4.99）、（43.53 ± 6.82）和（49.13 ± 6.58）MPa,3组之间差异均有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。6个月时粘接界面观察,SE组断裂模式均为粘接界面断裂;GBp组16个试件为牙本质内聚断裂,4个试件为复合树脂内聚断裂;SBU组28个试件为牙本质内聚断裂,8个试件为复合树脂内聚断裂。 结论　Single bond™ Universal即刻牙本质粘接强度和人工唾液老化后6个月粘接强度均显著高于Clearfil SE Bond、G-Bond plus;Single bond™ Universal粘接强度大,稳定耐久,可提供良好的粘接效果。     

不同浓度单宁酸在不同酸蚀模式下对通用型粘接剂粘接强度的影响

目的研究不同浓度单宁酸在全酸蚀与自酸蚀条件对通用型粘接剂在牙本质表面粘接强度的影响。 方法将60颗无龋离体人磨牙置于存储盒中随机盲取分成2组（全酸蚀A组与自酸蚀B组,n = 30）,再将每组随机分为5个亚组（n = 6）。在使用通用型粘接剂Single Bond Universal（SBU）前,在牙本质面分别涂抹浓度为0%（对照组）、25%、50%、75%和100%的单宁酸3 min并冲洗吹干。实验试件在37 ℃水中保存24 h后进行微拉伸强度测试（μTBSt）。使用Two-Way ANOVA与Games-Howell对数据进行统计学分析。用体式显微镜观察断裂面模式并在扫描电镜（SEM）下观察微拉伸试件的牙本质断端。 结果在全酸蚀模式下,75%单宁酸组粘接强度[（34.51 ± 8.43）MPa]与100%单宁酸组粘接强度[（36.16 ± 5.20）MPa]显著高于其他各组（F = 32.301,P<0.001）;在自酸蚀模式下,25%单宁酸[（31.06 ± 3.41）MPa]可显著提升SBU与牙本质粘接强度（F = 23.570,P<0.001）。双因素分析结果证实,单宁酸浓度（F = 23.134,P<0.001）与酸蚀模式（F = 4.465,P = 0.036）对粘接强度具有显著影响且两要素间显著相关（F = 28.231,P<0.001）。断裂模式分析与电镜观察结果表明,在牙本质表面不同酸蚀模式与不同浓度单宁酸所形成的界面形态差异显著。 结论在不同酸蚀模式下,不同浓度的单宁酸均可显著改善SBU与牙本质的粘接强度。     

通用型粘接剂和树脂水门汀对氧化锆剪切粘接强度的影响

目的 研究通用型粘接剂和树脂水门汀对氧化锆陶瓷剪切粘接强度和耐久性的影响。方法 氧化锆陶瓷烧结制作20 mm×10 mm×10 mm和10 mm×10 mm×10mm两种尺寸的试件,实验分为12组,将这2种试件分别采用不同的树脂水门汀（RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、Clearfil SAC自粘接树脂水门汀）和通用粘接剂（无粘接剂、Scotchbond通用粘接剂、Clearfil SE One粘接剂）在不同的储存条件（水浴、水浴+冷热循环）下进行粘接。测试剪切粘接强度,分析断裂形态。结果 水门汀（F=8.41,P<0.01）和粘接剂（F=30.34,P<0.01）对氧化锆剪切粘接强度的影响有统计学意义;储存条件对剪切粘接强度的影响无统计学意义（F=1.83,P=0.18）。RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、无粘接剂、水浴+冷热循环储存时的剪切粘接强度最低（14.02 MPa±6.86 MPa）,RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、Scotchbond通用粘接剂、水浴+冷热循环储存时的剪切粘接强度最高（54.12 MPa±8.37 MPa）。结论 通用型粘接剂可提高树脂水门汀对氧化锆的粘接耐久性。非自粘接的树脂水门汀如不使用通用型粘接剂则其粘接耐久性下降。     

通用型粘接剂和树脂水门汀对氧化锆 剪切粘接强度的影响

目的 研究通用型粘接剂和树脂水门汀对氧化锆陶瓷剪切粘接强度和耐久性的影响。方法 氧化锆陶瓷烧结制作20 mm×10 mm×10 mm和10 mm×10 mm×10mm两种尺寸的试件,实验分为12组,将这2种试件分别采用不同的树脂水门汀（RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、Clearfil SAC自粘接树脂水门汀）和通用粘接剂（无粘接剂、Scotchbond通用粘接剂、Clearfil SE One粘接剂）在不同的储存条件（水浴、水浴+冷热循环）下进行粘接。测试剪切粘接强度,分析断裂形态。结果 水门汀（F=8.41,P<0.01）和粘接剂（F=30.34,P<0.01）对氧化锆剪切粘接强度的影响有统计学意义;储存条件对剪切粘接强度的影响无统计学意义（F=1.83,P=0.18）。RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、无粘接剂、水浴+冷热循环储存时的剪切粘接强度最低（14.02 MPa±6.86 MPa）,RelyX Ultimate树脂水门汀、Scotchbond通用粘接剂、水浴+冷热循环储存时的剪切粘接强度最高（54.12 MPa±8.37 MPa）。结论 通用型粘接剂可提高树脂水门汀对氧化锆的粘接耐久性。非自粘接的树脂水门汀如不使用通用型粘接剂则其粘接耐久性下降。     

3种粘接材料与氧化锆陶瓷粘接抗剪切强度的比较

目的研究3种粘接材料与氧化锆陶瓷材料的初期及耐久粘接抗剪切强度。方法将预烧结氧化锆陶瓷片试件喷砂后分为3组,每组20个,分别采用玻璃离子水门汀(GIC组)、Panavia F 2.0树脂粘接剂(PF组)、Clearfil SA Luting树脂粘接剂(SAC组)与核树脂块粘接,每组随机选取10个试件进行冷热循环实验(10 000次,5～55℃),用计算机控制万能材料试验机测定其粘接抗剪切强度。结果未经冷热循环处理的GIC组、PF组、SAC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度值分别为(21.98±1.78)MPa、(30.26±1.73)MPa、(28.63±2.02)MPa,GIC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度低于其他两组(P<0.01),PF组与SAC组的试件相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);而冷热循环后,GIC组、PF组、SAC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度值分别为(10.72±2.03)MPa、(28.50±1.54)MPa、(27.02±1.79)MPa,GIC组试件经冷热循环后,其粘接抗剪切强度值明显下降(P<0.05),而其他两组试件经冷热循环后其粘接抗剪切强度值无明显改变(P>0.05)。结论使用玻璃离子可获得较好的初期粘接抗剪切强度,但耐久粘接强度欠佳;含磷酸酯单体的树脂粘接剂可使氧化锆陶瓷获得良好的初期粘接抗剪切强度及耐久粘接抗剪切强度;自粘接型树脂粘接剂操作简便,粘接抗剪切强度与自酸蚀型树脂粘接剂相当,且粘接效果持久。     

不同表面处理对LAVA树脂纳米瓷剪切强度的影响

目的 研究不同处理方式对树脂纳米瓷(LAVA Ultimate)与树脂水门汀粘接后剪切强度的影响。方法 本次实验分为喷砂实验和粘接实验两部分。将LAVA Ultimate切削成大小约 6 mm×6 mm,高度约为2 mm的样本80片,依照不同的喷砂时间和喷砂气压随机分为4组,每组10个试件,使用3M Single Bond Universal+3M RelyX Ultimate与纳米树脂柱粘接后在万能试验机上测试断裂载荷,计算剪切强度,选出最高组。同等喷砂条件下40个样本随机分为A(Single Bond Universal(3M)+RelyX Ultimate(3M)) ,B (Porcelain Primer(Bisco)+ All-bond Universal(Bisco)+RelyX Ultimate(3M))与纳米树脂柱进行粘接。粘接后再分成两个亚组,分别进行冷热循环5 000次和恒温水浴24 h。在万能试验机上测试断裂载荷,计算剪切强度,采用单因素方差分析对数据进行统计分析。结果 单因素方差分析结果表明不同喷砂条件的分组对剪切强度差异有统计学意义(第2组和第4组)(P=0.037);冷热循环后,A组和B组试件的剪切强度均有明显下降(P=0.003,P<0.01);A、B组不同粘接方式的剪切强度差异无统计学意义(P=0.062,P=0.671)。结论 0.2 MPa压力下喷砂14 s可明显提高树脂纳米瓷与树脂水门汀的剪切强度;冷热循环会明显降低剪切强度;粘接方式对剪切强度无明显影响。     

3种树脂粘接水门汀与铸造纯钛粘接强度研究

目的：研究3种复合树脂粘固剂与铸造纯钛的粘接强度。方法：用牙科铸钛的方法制作直径分别为4mm和5mm的钛棒,切割成长度为4mm的小钛片。2种规格的钛片配对粘接面用400～1200目碳化硅砂纸在流水下打磨抛光,使之呈均匀一致的平面。50μm氧化铝喷砂,另一组表面不喷砂作为对照,分别使用Super-BondC＆B、Panavia F、Rely X Unicem 3种复合树脂粘固剂粘接。扫描电镜观察喷砂前后铸造纯钛的表面形态。复合树脂粘接剂固化后经37℃恒温水浴24h以及5000次5～55℃冷热循环,测试剪切强度。用SAS的ANOVA过程对各组数据进行分析。结果：喷砂前后纯钛与Panavia F的剪切强度最高,分别为（26.62±3.40）MPa、（23.71±5.28）MPa;5000次冷热循环后,喷砂组的铸造纯钛与Panavia F的剪切强度最高（27.12±8.68）MPa;未喷砂的铸造纯钛与Super-Bond C＆B、Rely X Unicem的粘接强度最低,并且有12.5%的脱落率。结论：本实验结果表明喷砂可以提高Super-Bond C＆B、Panavia F、Rely X Unicem的粘结力和粘结耐久力。不喷砂时,Panavia F与铸造纯钛之间能获得较高的粘接强度和良好的粘接耐久性,喷砂以后优势不再明显。     

一种通用粘接剂对不同CAD/CAM可切削材料的短期粘接成绩

[摘要] 目的 评估一种通用粘接剂对于三种不同类型的CAD/CAM可切削材料的短期粘接成绩。方法 制作氧化钇稳定四方相氧化锆陶瓷,纳米复合陶瓷和二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷试件各20枚,其中前两者进行喷砂处理,后者进行HF酸蚀处理。各组陶瓷再分为2亚组,分别使用（SBU）或不使用（Ctr）通用粘接剂Single Bond Universal。以上表面处理瓷片与复合树脂柱通过树脂水门汀粘接,制作粘接试件,37℃水储24ｈ后测试剪切粘接强度并记录断裂模式。喷砂处理的氧化锆陶瓷和纳米复合陶瓷,以及酸蚀处理的二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷通过扫描电镜（SEM）观察表面微观形态。结果SEM观察显示酸蚀处理的二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷,喷砂处理的氧化锆陶瓷和纳米复合陶瓷相对于粗化处理前呈现出粗糙的表面形态。三种经粗化处理的材料使用通用粘接剂表面处理后,剪切强度较未使用者显著增强。结论 通用粘接剂Single Bond Universal能够增强氧化钇稳定四方相氧化锆陶瓷,纳米复合陶瓷和二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷三种类型CAD/CAM可切削材料的短期粘接强度。     

氯已定预处理对两步法自酸蚀粘接剂牙本质粘接界面稳定性的影响

目的：探讨氯已定预处理对两步法自酸蚀粘接剂的牙本质粘接界面稳定性的影响.方法：40颗离体人磨牙沿垂直于牙长轴的方向切割,暴露冠中部牙本质作为粘接面,牙本质试件随机分为两组,一组在粘接处理前涂布0.2％氯已定为实验组,一组无预处理为对照组,两组经两步法自酸蚀粘接剂SE Bond处理后,堆积复合树脂制备成粘接试件.每组随机抽取2个试件借助微拉曼光谱仪分析粘接剂的双键转化率,剩余的18个试件随机分为两个亚组,分别于即刻和冷热循环5000次后检测微拉伸粘接强度和界面的纳米渗漏情况.结果：0.2％氯已定预处理对SE Bond的树脂双键转化率无显著性影响（P＞0.05）.即刻测试时,对照组和实验组间的微拉伸粘接强度和纳米渗漏差异无统计学意义（PP ＞0.05）.冷热循环老化处理后,实验组的微拉伸粘接强度显著高于对照组,纳米渗漏程度显著低于对照组（P＜0.05）.结论：0.2％氯已定预处理不会干扰SE Bond的树脂聚合,且可提高其与牙本质粘接界面的稳定性.     

树脂水门汀与氧化锆陶瓷剪切粘接强度的研究

目的评估不同实验条件下树脂水门汀与氧化锆瓷之间的剪切粘接强度（SBS）。 方法使用计算机辅助设计与制作（CAD/CAM）设备切割并烧结制作6个边长为2 cm的正方体氧化锆试件。按不同实验条件将8种双固化树脂水门汀分为13组（n = 20）：（1）Monobond N + Multilink N（MMN组）;（2）Ivoclean + Monobond N + Multilink N（IMM组）;（3）Ivoclean + Monobond N + Multilink N[无喷砂,IMM（ns）组];（4）Tetric N-Bond Universal + Multilink Speed（TUM组）;（5）Multilink Speed（MLS组）;（6）Z-Prime Plus + TheraCem（ZPT组）;（7）Z-Prime Plus + Duo-Link（ZPD组）;（8）Single Bond Universal + RelyX U200（SRU组）;（9）RelyX U200（RXU组）;（10）Single Bond Universal + RelyX Ultimate Clicker（SRU组）;（11）OptiBond Versa + Kerr NX3（OVK组）;（12）Clearfil Universal Bond + Clearfil SAC（CUS组）;（13）Clearfil SAC（SAC组）。将每组树脂水门汀自混合注入透明模具并将其无压力置于氧化锆面后进行光照固化。所有试件在37 ℃水中存储24 h后进行SBS测试。采用SPSS 19.0软件One-Way ANOVA（P<0.05）对SBS进行统计学分析。利用电子体视显微镜观察氧化锆端断裂界面。 结果本实验中13组树脂水门汀的SBS（单位：MPa）降序排列依次为：OVK（27.51 ± 3.65）>IMM（27.28 ± 3.79）>SRC（26.77 ± 3.62）>CUS（25.36 ± 3.10）>TUM（25.22 ± 4.88）>ZPD（23.96 ± 6.25）>MLS（23.13 ± 2.74）>MMN（23.07 ± 3.71）>SAC（22.20 ± 3.59）>IMM（ns）（21.99 ± 3.50）>SRU（19.19 ± 2.27）>ZPT（18.62 ± 2.08）>RXU（15.04 ± 4.02）。 结论（1）不同树脂水门汀的SBS具有材料依赖性;（2）在氧化锆表面进行喷砂处理、使用专用清洗剂或将通用型粘接剂作为底漆使用有利于提高树脂水门汀的SBS。     

����մɱ��治ͬ����������֬ˮ��͡ճ��ǿ��Ӱ���о�

??Objective    To study the effect of different surface treatment for hybrid ceramic on bonding strength of adhesive resin. Methods    The Vita Enamic block was cut by CAD/CAM. The specimens??36 pieces??size??10 mm × 10 mm ×3 mm??were randomly divided into six groups??6 pieces per group????control group??sandblasting group??etching group??silane group??etching+silane group and sandblasting+silane group. The adhesive area was circle of radius 2 mm??on the center of surface treated. The adhesive resin??EmbracTM??dual cure??was placed on the adhesive area??up to height 4 mm. The bonding strength of each group was detected by the universal material testing machine after 24 h of  adhesive resin cure. Results    The bonding strength was as follows at the speed of 0.5 mm/min??control group??6.2199 ± 0.9662??MPa??sandblasting group??8.3043 ± 1.2074??MPa??etching group??7.2266 ± 1.1112??MPa??silane group??15.0703 ± 1.1033??MPa??etching+sliane group??9.6446 ± 1.1725??MPa and sandblasting+silane group??13.1765 ± 2.312??MPa. Statistical analysis was performed using AVOVA. There was singnificant difference in the bonding strength between each group??except between etching and sandlasting group??etching and control group??P < 0.05??. Conclusion    The surface of hybride ceramic treated by sandblasting??etching and silane??alone or combined??can enhance the bonding strength of adhesive resin. The result of sandblasting group is better than etching group??and the silane is the best among them for the bonding strength of  adhesive resin with hybrid ceramic.     

Effects of surface treatments on bond strength of glass-infiltrated ceramic

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of various surface treatments on the bond strength at the In-Ceram/resin composite interface. Ninety-eight In-Ceram specimens were divided into seven groups and exposed to various surface treatments as follows: (A) control (B) saliva contamination (C) saliva contamination plus aluminum oxide sandblasting (D) glove powder contamination (E) glove powder contamination plus aluminum oxide sandblasting (F) rough aluminum oxide sandblasting and (G) excess glass infiltration. A resin composite cylinder was cemented to each In-Ceram specimen with Panavia 21 resin luting cement. Half of the cemented specimens in each group were stored in water for 24 h, and the other half were stored in water for 2 weeks and then were thermo-cycled for 2000 cycles. Shear bond strengths (SBS) of seven specimens in each subgroup were determined and analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test as well as Student's t-test. Scanning electronic microscopy was used to identify the type of bond failure. Shear bond strength was significantly decreased by saliva and glove powder contaminations (P < 0.05). Sandblasting treatment did not improve the saliva-contaminated specimens. However, the glove powder plus sandblasting group showed no significant difference in SBS compared with the control group. There was no significant difference in SBS between the excess glass-infiltrating group and the control group. The SBS was significantly decreased by rough aluminum oxide sandblasting (P < 0.05). The SBS values of groups without thermocycling were significantly greater than those of groups with thermocycling (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences among SBS values of the seven groups with thermocycling. Combined cohesive and adhesive bond failures were seen in every group. Various surface treatments or contaminants may significantly influence the bond strength of In-Ceram restorative in clinical use.     

Bonding interface and dentin enzymatic activity of two universal adhesives applied following different etching approaches

ObjectivesEtching approaches [37% phosphoric acid, self-etching, 10–3 solution (3% ferric chloride dissolved in 10% citric acid), or 1.4% nitric acid] were evaluated regarding enamel shear bond strength (24 h), dentin microtensile bond strength (24 h and 2 years), failure mode, enzymatic activity of the hybrid layer, and nanoleakage (24 h and 2 years) of Prime&Bond Universal (PBU, Dentsply-Sirona) and Gluma Bond Universal (GBU, Kulzer).MethodsAdhesives were applied on blot-dried (wet-bonding, positive control) or air-dried (remaining groups) dentin after acid-etching (15 s) or in self-etch mode. Enamel and dentin bond strength tests used 160 human teeth (n = 10). Failure mode of tested samples and nanoleakage within the dentin-adhesive interface (n = 5) were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. Dentin enzymatic activity was investigated by in situ zymography (n = 3).ResultsEnamel bond strengths did not differ statistically among groups. Wet-bonding with 37% phosphoric acid showed similar dentin bond strength compared to 10–3 solution or 1.4% nitric acid at 24 h for both adhesives. None of the etchants inhibited enzymatic activity, and all groups showed dentin bond strength reduction after 2-year storage. GBU showed higher nanoleakage. Experimental etchants did not affect enamel bond strength. Dentin bond strength was not stable after 2 years, despite promising 24-hour results.SignificanceThis study suggests multiple etching approaches to optimize and achieve stable dentin bonding, while also offering in-depth information about the performance of recently released universal adhesive systems.     

Shear Bond Strengths of Resin Adhesive Cements to Dentin and Ni-Cr-Be Alloy

Two adhesives, Super Bond and Panavia, were evaluated for shear bond strength to dentin. Twenty human teeth were used for each adhesive. Bonding sites were prepared in dentin (600 grit) and the adhesives applied according to the manufacturers'instructions. Bond strengths were determined with an Instron testing machine at 24 hours. Super Bond developed the strongest bond of 21.59 ± 3.91 MPa. Panavia produced a lower bond strength of 2.68 ± 1.45 MPa. Statistically, Super Bond was found to have a stronger bond than Panavia. The same two adhesives were applied to Ni-Cr-Be specimens and compared to Comspan. Twenty Rexillium III specimens were used for each adhesive at 24 hours and 20 for thermocycling. The metal specimens were ground flat (600 grit) and then air abraded with 50-micron aluminous oxide. The adhesives were applied to the metal surface in accordance with the manufacturers'instructions. One group was tested at 24 hours while the second group was tested after thermocycling (2,500 cycles at 6°C to 60°C). At 24 hours, Super Bond had a significantly stronger bond than the other materials. Comparison of the 24-hour to thermocycled bond strengths found Comspan had a significant increase in bond strength, Panavia had no significant change and Super Bond had a significant decrease in bond strength. After 2,500 thermocycles, Comspan, Panavia, and Super Bond were not significantly different in bond strength.     

Influence of application method on surface free‐energy and bond strength of universal adhesive systems to enamel

The aim of the present study was to determine the influence of different adhesive application methods and etching modes on enamel bond effectiveness of universal adhesives using shear bond strength (SBS) testing and surface free‐energy (SFE) measurements. The adhesives Scotchbond Universal, All‐Bond Universal, Adhese Universal, and G‐Premio Bond were used. Prepared bovine enamel specimens were divided into four groups, based on type of adhesive, and subjected to the following surface treatments: (i) total‐etch mode with active application; (ii) total‐etch mode with inactive application; (iii) self‐etch mode with active application; and (iv) self‐etch mode with inactive application. Bonded specimens were subjected to SBS testing. The SFE of the enamel surfaces with adhesive was measured after rinsing with acetone and water. The SBS values in total‐etch mode were significantly higher than those in self‐etch mode. In total‐etch mode, significantly lower SBS values were observed with active application compared with inactive application; in contrast, in self‐etch mode there were no significant differences in SBS between active and inactive applications. A reduction in total SFE was observed for active application compared with inactive application. The interaction between etching mode and application method was statistically significant, and the application method significantly affected enamel bond strength in total‐etch mode.     

不同表面处理方法在纳米混合树脂复合材料修复中的应用

目的： 分析不同表面处理方法和粘接剂自酸蚀功能单体对树脂-复合材料界面即时修复粘结强度和完整性的影响。方法： 采用纳米树脂复合材料制作98个树脂复合材料,随机分为A1、A2、B1、B2、C、D组,各14个试件。表面未处理的试件作为阳性对照组（14个试件）。A1组用Gluma 通用粘接剂系统抛光,A2组用Gluma 通用粘接剂系统抛光、喷砂,B1组用Tokuyama Bond ForceⅡ^TM粘结系统抛光,B2组用Tokuyama Bond ForceⅡ^TM抛光、喷砂,C组仅经抛光样品组。D组仅做喷砂。采用与底物相同的树脂复合材料,对修复后试件进行剪切粘结强度（shear bond strength,SBS）测试,所有样本均进行电子显微镜扫描、测定表面轮廓,进行失效分析。采用SPSS 20.0软件包对数据进行统计学处理。结果： D组修复粘结强度显著高于阴性对照组（P<0.05）,A1、A2、B2、B1组粘结强度显著高于C、D组（P<0.05）;B1、D或A1组相比,粘结强度无显著差异（P>0.05）;B2组、阳性对照组粘结强度无显著差异（P>0.05）。除喷砂、TBFⅡ外,阳性对照组粘合强度值显著高于A1、C组（P<0.05）。抛光后表面粘合失效率高于喷砂样本（P<0.05）;抛光、Gluma处理样品粘合失败率高于抛光、TBFⅡ处理样品（P<0.05）;喷砂、TBFⅡ处理的表面内聚破坏率高于抛光、TBFⅡ处理（P<0.05）。抛光技术的表面粗糙度与喷砂技术相比,较规则且粗糙度较低（P<0.05）。结论： 经喷砂处理的复合材料基材加TBFⅡ,其修复粘结性最强,且表面内聚破坏率较高,TBFⅡ处理粘合失败率低。但经喷砂处理后的材料易堆积食物残渣,而抛光后的材料则不易发生。使用喷砂处理的复合材料基材上加TBFⅡ的患者,需正确有效地维护口腔卫生。     

粉液比例对树脂加强型玻璃离子托槽粘接的影响

目的比较不同粉液比例改变对树脂加强型玻璃离子粘接剂托槽粘接效果的影响。 方法将140颗离体人上颌前磨牙随机分为7组,每组20颗。将树脂加强型玻璃离子粘接剂粉剂改变范围设置成(-30%~30%),具体分组如下：对照组、A组(+30%)、B组(+23%)、C组(+17%)、D组(-17%)、E组(-23%)、F组(-30%)。每组牙齿经过牙面处理后用不同粉液比例树脂加强型玻璃离子粘接剂进行托槽粘接。记录粘接24 h的抗剪切强度和粘接残留指数,用SPSS 19.0对实验结果进行统计分析。 结果A~E组的抗剪切强度与对照组相比差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05),但降低30%粉剂比例的F组的抗剪切强度(5.71 ± 1.55)MPa比对照组(7.55 ± 1.20)MPa降低,且两者差异有统计学意义(P=0.017),F组具有较低的粘接残留量。 结论树脂加强型玻璃离子有较宽的临床使用范围,增加粉剂比例对树脂加强型玻璃离子粘接剂托槽粘接强度无明显影响,但降低30%粉剂比例则会降低其粘接强度。     

Dentin and enamel bond strengths of dual-cure composite luting agents used with dual-cure dental adhesives

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare dentin and enamel bond strengths obtained with dual-cure composite luting agents when used with dual-cure dental adhesives. METHODS: Human molars were ground flat to expose enamel (n=80) or dentin (n=80). Specimens in each substrate group were randomly assigned to eight treatment sub-groups, according to four adhesive-luting agent combinations and two test conditions (with or without thermocycling). Pre-polymerized composite resin posts (TPH Spectrum) were luted to either the enamel or dentin surfaces with one of the following adhesive-luting agent combinations: (1) Xeno IV Dual Cure (dual-cure self-etch adhesive) and Calibra (dual-cure luting agent); (2) Prime & Bond NT Dual Cure (dual-cure total-etch adhesive) and Calibra; (3) OptiBond All-in-One Dual Cure (dual-cure self-etch adhesive) and Nexus 2 Dual Syringe (dual-cure luting agent); (4) OptiBond Solo Plus Dual Cure (dual-cure total-etch adhesive) and Nexus 2 Dual Syringe. For each treatment sub-group, half the specimens (n=10) were tested after 24h storage in water at 37 degrees C, and the other half (n=10) were tested after thermocycling for 1800 cycles between water baths held at 5 and 55 degrees C, with a dwell time in each bath of 30s, and a transfer time of 10s. Bond strengths were measured in shear mode, and expressed in MPa. The fracture mode (adhesive, cohesive, mixed) was examined. Data were analyzed for statistical significance with a factorial ANOVA and post hoc tests. RESULTS: Mean enamel bond strengths ranged from 8.4MPa for non-thermocycled OptiBond All-in-One|Nexus 2 to 35.5MPa for non-thermocycled Prime & Bond NT|Calibra. Mean dentin bond strengths ranged from 14.5MPa for non-thermocycled OptiBond Solo Plus|Nexus 2 to 30.9MPa for thermocycled Xeno IV|Calibra. The fracture mode was predominantly adhesive for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: On enamel, the total-etch adhesives performed better than their self-etch counterparts, while in dentin, the opposite was found, i.e., the self-etch adhesives performed better than their total-etch counterparts. Thermocycling for 1800 cycles did not affect the SBS of the materials tested to dentin and enamel.