不同自酸蚀黏接系统对窝沟封闭剂微渗漏影响的实验研究

目的探讨不同自酸蚀黏接系统对窝沟封闭剂封闭性能和渗透性的影响。方法收集新鲜拔除的离体第三磨牙36颗,随机分成4组,每组9颗,面釉质以杯刷清洁30s;以37%正磷酸酸蚀作为对照组,以ClearFil SE Bond、XenoⅢ以及iBond分别对牙釉质进行黏接作为实验组。涂布可见光固化窝沟封闭剂3MConcise White,光照固化。每组中8颗用1%亚甲基蓝进行染色法检查微渗漏,1颗采用扫描电镜观察封闭剂渗入窝沟的深度以及窝沟封闭剂和牙体组织之间的结合界面的状况。结果Clear FilSE Bond以及XenoⅢ自酸蚀黏接时,对封闭剂微渗漏的影响与对照组相比差异无统计学意义;扫描电镜下,磷酸酸蚀、ClearFil SE Bond以及XenoⅢ组在窝沟封闭中使封闭剂与牙釉质密合性好。结论第五代自酸蚀黏接剂ClearFil SE Bond以及第六代XenoⅢ与牙釉质之间具有良好的封闭能力,可以推荐临床使用。     

丁香油酚对全酸蚀/自酸蚀牙本质粘接系统微拉伸强度的影响

目的:评价含丁香油酚的暂封剂氧化锌丁香油糊剂(zincoxide- eugenol ,ZOE)对全酸蚀/自酸蚀牙本质粘接系统微拉伸强度的影响。方法:选择因正畸拔除的完整、无龋前磨牙;两种全酸蚀牙本质粘接系统:AllBond 2和SingleBond ,两种自酸蚀牙本质粘接系统:ClearfilSEBond和iBond。实验组使用氧化锌丁香油糊剂;对照组牙本质表面不做任何处理;分别存储于3 7℃的蒸馏水中,一周后两组分别使用4种牙本质粘接系统,用微拉伸法测试粘接强度。在体视显微镜下观察断裂界面。结果:双因素方差分析使用ZOE对粘接强度有显著影响(P <0 .0 5 ) ,粘接剂的类型对粘接强度无显著性影响(P >0 .0 5 ) ,交互作用有统计学意义(P <0 .0 5 )。多重比较提示,AllBond 2和SingleBond的实验组和对照组无显著性差异,而ClearfilSEBond和iBond实验组的微拉伸强度明显低于对照组,有显著性差异。体视显微镜下观察断裂多发生在粘接剂内。结论:含丁香油酚的暂封剂氧化锌丁香油糊剂对全酸蚀系统的AllBond 2和SingleBond的粘接强度无影响,对自酸蚀系统的ClearfilSEBond和iBond有显著不利影响。     

自酸蚀黏接系统对充填体边缘密合性影响的研究

目的 观察4种自酸蚀黏接系统对充填体在牙釉质和牙骨质处边缘密合性的影响。方法 36颗离体牙于颊、舌侧牙颈部预备Ⅴ类洞型，分别用4种自酸蚀黏接材料（Prime ＆ Bond NT，SE-Bond，Adper^TM Prompt^TM，FL-Bond）处理后，充填4种牙体充填材料（Dyract AP、Cleanrfil AP-X、3MZ100、Beautifil），采用染料渗透和扫描电镜方法观察温度循环前后充填体在牙釉质和牙骨质处的密合性。结果 4种充填体在经温度循环后，牙釉质处的密合性都明显降低（P〈0．01）；在牙骨质处，Dyract AP和Clearfil AP-X的密合性无明显变化（P〉0．05），3MZ100密合性明显提高（P〈0．01），而Beautifil的密合性明显降低（P〈0．05）。结论 4种自酸蚀黏接材料在牙釉质处的黏接强度有待进一步增强以获得良好的边缘密合性。     

LED�̻�ϵͳӦ���������������޸��о�

目的    探讨LED固化系统应用于乳牙复合体修复后，对边缘密闭性、操作时间、操作复杂程度的影响。方法    收集2007—2008年中山大学附属口腔医院儿童口腔科拔除的离体乳磨牙97颗，将牙冠制备成牙片，表面制备Ⅰ类洞，共成功制备牙片84片。将制备了洞型的牙片随机分为A、B、C、D4组，每组21个。A组：F2000复合体+Xeno Ⅲ黏结系统+QTH光固化系统；B组：F2000复合体+Xeno Ⅲ黏结系统+ LED光固化系统；C组：Dyract复合体+Xeno Ⅲ黏结系统+QTH光固化系统；D组：Dyract复合体+Xeno Ⅲ黏结系统+LED光固化系统。温度循环法模拟体内状况处理样本后，扫描电镜观察，并行染料渗透实验。单盲法对二维微渗漏情况进行观察。结果    各组二维微渗漏程度的组间差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。经扫描电镜观察可见，无论采用何种组合方式，充填材料均密实无裂隙，周边牙体组织完好无裂纹，黏结剂的分布都比较均匀连续。结论    由于LED固化系统具有良好的边缘密闭性、操作时间短和操作便利等突出优点，值得口腔临床推广使用。     

5种牙本质粘结系统粘结强度的比较

目的用微拉伸粘结强度检测法评价5种不同类型的牙本质粘结系统与正常牙本质的粘结强度,用体视显微镜分析其断裂类型。方法选择25颗正畸治疗拔除的健康前磨牙,去除面釉质层,随机均分为5组。选用5种牙本质粘结系统:传统三步法全酸蚀粘结系统All-Bond2组、两步法全酸蚀粘结系统Prime&BondNT组、两步法自酸蚀粘结系统Fluoro-Bond组、一步法自酸蚀粘结系统XenoⅢ组和一步法自酸蚀粘结系统iBond组,分别用于暴露的表层牙本质面上,再用蓝色复合树脂恢复牙冠至要求高度。用低速锯将牙齿片切为横截面积约0.81mm2的长方体状样本,用微拉伸测试仪检测其粘结强度,加载速度为1mm/min。用体视显微镜观察样本断端形态。用SPSS11.5对微拉伸粘结强度测试值进行统计学分析。结果5种牙本质粘结系统的微拉伸粘结强度分别为All-Bond2组(28.74±5.15)MPa,Prime&BondNT组(25.85±3.37)MPa、Fluoro-Bond组(20.60±2.96)MPa、Xeno组(22.93±3.97)MPa、iBond组(25.67±4.72)MPa。All-Bond2组的微拉伸粘结强度与Prime&BondNT组测值之间差异无显著性,高于Fluoro-Bond组、Xeno组和iBond组,后两者的测值间差异无显著性,Fluoro-Bond组和Xeno组亦无显著差异。体视显微镜观察结果显示,绝大部分样本的断裂类型都是粘结面型断裂。结论5种牙本质粘结系统与正常牙本质的粘结强度存在差异,All-Bond2的粘结强度最高,但临床操作复杂,技术要求较高;XenoⅢ、iBond使用方法较简单,对牙髓的影响可能较小。     

五种牙本质粘结系统微拉伸强度的比较

目的比较不同类型自酸蚀牙本质粘结系统的粘结强度,为临床应用提供参考。方法选择4种自酸蚀粘结系统Clearfil S3Bond,i Bond,Clearfil SE Bond,XenoⅢ,1种全酸蚀粘结系统Single Bond2,用微拉伸法测试这些粘结系统的粘结强度并进行比较。结果全酸蚀粘结剂Single Bond2的微拉伸强度最高,与自酸蚀粘结剂粘结强度有显著差异（P〈0.05）。自酸蚀粘结剂i Bond,S3Bond,XenoⅢ两两之间粘结强度无显著差异（P〉0.05）。SE Bond的粘结强度显著高于i Bond,S3Bond和XenoⅢ（P〈0.05）。结论第五代牙本质粘结剂具有较强的粘结强度,但第七代牙本质粘结剂临床操作更为方便。     

预酸蚀对非龋性硬化牙本质黏结强度的影响

目的：评价预酸蚀处理提高3种自酸蚀黏结剂对牙颈部非龋性硬化牙本质黏结的有效性。方法：选择牙颈部有典型硬化牙本质的离体牙29个，其中24个随机分3组，每组8个牙，分别应用黏结剂Contax、Clearfil TRI—S Bond及Xeno Ⅲ，剩余5个牙用来观察硬化牙本质表面微观结构。以等分硬化牙本质的方式纵向切开每个牙齿，一半先用350g／L磷酸酸蚀15s，然后应用黏结剂，另一半直接应用黏结剂。在黏结剂上充填复合树脂并固化，24h后片切制作微拉伸黏结试件，测试拉伸黏结强度，并在扫描电镜下观察断裂面。结果：Contax与Clearfil TRI—S Bond2种黏结剂的预酸蚀组的黏结强度明显高于未预酸蚀黏结组（P〈0．01），XenoⅢ预酸蚀组与未预酸蚀黏结组拉伸黏结强度无显著性差异（P〉0．05）。结论：用350g／L的磷酸预酸蚀能够提高一些自酸蚀黏结剂对非龋性硬化牙本质的黏结强度。     

四种自酸蚀粘接剂牙本质粘接界面纳米渗漏比较

目的 比较4种自酸蚀粘接剂牙本质粘接界面纳米渗漏及微观形态。方法 选取16颗无龋人离体第三磨牙,制备统一的牙本质玷污层,分别用4种自酸蚀粘接剂A( Adper Prompt)、B( iBond)、C(XenoⅢ)及D(SE Bond)按使用说明进行粘接处理,垂直粘接面切成0.9 mmx4.0 mm试件,避光贮存于氨...     

自酸蚀粘接剂结合流动树脂对年轻恒牙窝沟封闭的临床评价

目的：应用自酸蚀粘接剂XenoⅢ结合流动树脂Esthet—XFlow对年轻恒磨牙进行窝沟封闭术,观察3年内封闭剂保留率和龋病预防情况。方法：选择130例6～10岁儿童已完全萌出第一恒磨牙520颗,采用自身半口对照方法。随机选择一侧为实验组,采用自酸蚀粘接剂处理牙面后以流动树脂进行窝沟封闭;另一侧为对照组,应用传统磷酸酸蚀法以窝沟封闭剂进行窝沟封闭。记录所需操作时间,并定期复查封闭剂保留情况和患龋情况。’结果：实验组封闭1颗牙的操作时间为（110±9）s,较对照组（237士15）S短（P〈O．01）。术后1、2、3年复查时实验组窝沟封闭剂保留率高于对照组,龋病发病率低于对照组,除第1年龋病发病率外其余数据均有统计学差异（P〈0．05）。结论：自酸蚀粘接剂结合流动树脂进行窝沟封闭,可简化操作步骤,降低患者依从性的要求,提高材料保留率,能有效预防年轻恒牙窝沟龋的发生。     

��������������ȫ��Ƕ���Ե΢��©�о�

目的评价4种黏结剂对氧化锆全瓷嵌体边缘微渗漏的影响。方法选取2012年8月佛山市禅城区向阳医院口腔科新鲜拔除的上颌第三磨牙40颗,随机分为A、B、C、D组,每组10颗,制备V类洞形。4组离体牙分别采用全酸蚀黏结剂AdperSinglebond2（A组）及自酸蚀黏结荆ClearFilSEBond（B组）、MultilinkSpnnt（C组）和AdperEasyOne（D组）黏结氧化锆全瓷嵌体,修复后离体牙经冷热循环后行2％亚甲基蓝染色,根管显微镜下观察各组微渗漏程度并进行比较。结果在铪壁,c组微渗漏明显高于A和B组,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;但与D组差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。在龈壁,c组微渗漏明显高于其他3组,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;而其他3组之间差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论自酸蚀黏结剂ClearFilSEBond和AdperEasyOne的封闭能力较好,且较全酸蚀黏结剂操作简单方便,推荐临床使用。     

不同自酸蚀黏结系统对窝沟封闭剂黏结强度的实验研究

目的:评价不同自酸蚀黏结系统对窝沟封闭剂剪切黏结强度的影响.方法:将24颗正畸拔除的前磨牙随机分为4组,以1种两步法自酸蚀黏结剂Clearfil SE Bond(A组)和3种一步法自酸蚀黏结剂XenoⅢ(B组),Adper Prompt(C组),Tokuyama Bond Force(D组)分别与3M Concise窝...     

The effect of occlusal loading on the microleakage of class V restorations

OBJECTIVE: This in vitro study evaluated the microleakage of Class V cavities restored with a resin composite and different adhesive systems after occlusal loading. METHODS & MATERIALS: Standardized box-shaped Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal side of 135 non-carious human premolars. The teeth were randomly divided into three groups of 45 premolars each and restored as follows: Group 1-two-step total-etch adhesive (Single Bond, 3M) + resin composite (Supreme, 3M ESPE); Group 2-two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE, Kuraray) + resin composite and Group 3-one-step self-etch adhesive (Xeno III, Dentsply) + resin composite. The restorations were finished with aluminum oxide discs (Sof-Lex, 3M). Fifteen teeth in each group received 10,000 x 100 N and 250 N occlusal loads, respectively, and the remaining 15 teeth served as the control. The premolars were immersed in 2% methylene blue for 24 hours. The dye penetration was examined under a stereomicroscope, and the results were statistically analyzed by Kruskal Wallis, Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests to determine differences between the groups. RESULTS: Gingival margins showed more dye penetration than occlusal margins in all the tested groups (p<0.05). In all the tested adhesive systems, 100 N occlusal loading did not change dye penetration; however, Groups 1 and 2 exhibited better marginal sealing than Group 3 at the enamel margins under 250 N occlusal loading. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it may be concluded that enamel margins provided better marginal sealing than dentin/cementum margins and the two-step self-etch adhesive exhibited better marginal sealing than an all-in-one adhesive at the enamel margins under 250 N occlusal loading.     

Effect of single step adhesives on the marginal permeability of Class V resin composites

This in vitro study evaluated the coronal and apical marginal microleakage of four self-etch, seventh generation adhesive systems. Sixty non-carious human molars were randomly assigned to four groups (n = 12). Class V cavities were prepared on the facial or lingual surface of each tooth with coronal margins in enamel and apical margins in cementum (dentin) at the cementoenamel junction. The preparations were restored using four self-etch adhesive systems (iBond, G-Bond, Xeno IV and Clearfil S3 Bond) and a control (no adhesive), followed by insertion of Gradia Direct microfilled hybrid resin composite. The teeth (specimens) were thermocycled 1,000 cycles, immersed in 1% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and invested in acrylic resin. The specimen blocks were then sectioned longitudinally, with dye penetration (microleakage) examined using a 20x binocular microscope. Coronal and apical margins were scored separately for microleakage using a 0-3 ordinal ranking system. Data were analyzed using non-parametric tests at a p < 0.05 level of significance. A comparison of adhesive and control groups at the coronal and apical margins revealed that significant (p < .0001) differences were exhibited. At the coronal margin, Xeno IV revealed significantly less leakage than the other adhesives, with Clearfil S3 Bond exhibiting significantly less leakage at the apical margin. Groups with no adhesive treatment (control) showed significantly greater leakage at both the coronal and apical margin locations. A Wilcoxon signed rank test showed no significant differences at the coronal compared to the apical margins of the four adhesive systems and control tested.     

Two-year clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions

Objectives

Adhesive systems are continuously being introduced to Dentistry, unfortunately often without sufficient clinical validation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of cervical restorations done with three different adhesive systems.

Material and methods

158 non-carious cervical lesions of 23 patients were restored with a nanofilled composite resin (Filtek Supreme, 3M/ESPE) combined with Single Bond (3M/ESPE, group SI), Clearfil SE (Kuraray Medical Inc., group CL) and Xeno III (De Trey Dentsply, group XE). In groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B, the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin was removed by roughening with a diamond bur before application of the respective adhesive systems. In groups CL-BP and XE-BP, after removal of the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin with the bur, the remaining dentin was etched with 37% phosphoric acid and the self-etch adhesive systems Clearfil SE and Xeno III were applied, respectively. Lesions were evaluated at baseline, and restorations after 3 months, 1 year and 2 years using modified USPHS criteria.

Results

After 2 years, no significant difference was found between the retention rates of the groups (p >0.05). Although groups CL and SI showed significantly better marginal adaptation than group XE (p<0.05) at 2 years, no significant difference was found between the marginal adaptation of the groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B (p>0.05). After 2 years no significant difference was observed among the marginal staining results of all groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion

Although all adhesive systems showed similar retention rates, Clearfil SE and Single Bond showed better marginal adaptation than Xeno III after 2 years of follow-up.     

Ex vivo evaluation of dye penetration associated with various dentine bonding agents in conjunction with different irrigation solutions used within the pulp chamber

Aim To compare the effect of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), chlorhexidine, povidone iodine and sodium ascorbate on dye penetration associated with various dentine adhesives used within the pulp chamber. Methodology One hundred and sixteen mandibular molar teeth were divided into eight groups of 12 teeth each by irrigation regimen and adhesive system. The roof of pulp chambers and roots were removed under water cooling. The pulp chambers in the experimental groups were irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl, 0.2% chlorhexidine, 5% w/v povidone iodine or 5.25% NaOCl followed by sodium ascorbate and restored with Surefil using either Prime & Bond NT or Xeno III with each irrigation regimen. Twenty teeth were used as control specimens in which no disinfectant was used before bonding. Ten teeth from each group were immersed in 2% methylene blue dye and assessed for dye penetration. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U‐tests. Two samples in each group were observed under scanning electron microscopy for interfacial gap evaluation. Results No significant difference was found in dye leakage between control and groups with 5.25% NaOCl pretreatment with both adhesive systems. Chlorhexidine and povidone iodine pretreatment resulted in significantly less dye penetration with Xeno III as compared with Prime & Bond NT. Sodium ascorbate treatment following NaOCl application significantly reduced microleakage and improved the marginal adaptation with both adhesive systems. Conclusions The type of irrigant affected the sealing ability of bonding agents inside the pulp chamber and was material specific. Xeno III had less dye penetration with CHX and povidone iodine whilst sodium ascorbate pretreatment after NaOCl reduced dye penetration with both PBNT and Xeno III.