光固化型和化学固化型玻璃离子水门汀与光固化复合树脂间的抗剪粘接强度

测定两种光固化型玻璃离子水门汀（ＬＧＩＣ）和两种化学固化型玻璃离子水门汀（ＧＩＣ）与光固化复合树脂间的抗剪粘接强度。结果显示：不论对ＬＧＣ，ＧＩＣ表面酸蚀与否，ＬＧＩＣ与光固化复合树脂间的粘接强度均比ＧＩＣ高，且相互极显著（Ｐ＜０．０１）；酸蚀ＬＧＩＣ，ＧＩＣ表面，其与光固化复合树脂间的粘接强度都会提高，相差极显著（Ｐ＜０．０１）。     

光固化型和化学固化型玻璃离子水门汀与光固化复合树脂间的…

测定两种光固化型玻璃离子水门汀（ＬＧＩＣ）和两种化学固化型玻璃离子水门汀（ＧＬＣ）与光固化复合树脂间的抗剪粘接强度。结果显示，不论对ＬＧＩＣ，ＧＩＣ表面酸蚀与否，ＬＧＩＣ与光固化复合树脂间的粘接强度均化ＧＩＣ高，且相差极显著；酸蚀ＬＧＩＣ，ＧＩＣ表面，其与光固化复合树脂间的粘接强度都会提高，相差极显著。     

Nd：YAG激光处理与磷酸酸蚀牙本质后抗剪切粘结强度的比较研究

应用４组能量参数不同的Ｎｄ：ＹＡＧ激光处理及磷酸酸蚀牙本质表面后，分别与光固化复合树脂粘结，比较各激光处理组与酸蚀组之间抗剪切粘结强度的差别。结果表明：激光处理组的抗剪切粘结强度高于酸蚀组，其中，４０ｍＪ１５ｐｐｓ激光处理组的抗剪切粘结强度明显高于酸蚀组（Ｐ〈０．０１），并高于其它激光处理组（Ｐ〉０．０５）。讨论了Ｎｄ：ＹＡＧ激光对牙本质表面的作用，及其与光固化复合树脂良好粘结机理和其临床应用的安     

Dyract与玻璃离子水门汀治疗楔状缺损的疗效比较

目的对Ｄｙｒａｃｔ与玻璃离子水门汀（ＧＩＣ）治疗楔状缺损的临床疗效进行比较。方法用Ｄｙｒａｃｔ充填９２例３１２颗楔状缺损的患牙,ＧＩＣ充填１４５例３４６颗患牙,定期随访两年,观察形态、密合度、边缘着色、色泽、继发龋、牙龈炎症、牙髓反应七个方面的治疗效果。结果半年内两者临床效果无差异（Ｐ＞０．０５）,１年后有显著差异（Ｐ＜０．０５）,２年后有高度显著差异（Ｐ＜０．００５）。且Ｄｙｒａｃｔ在形态、色泽、密合度、继发龋、牙龈炎症等５个方面均优于ＧＩＣ（Ｐ＜０．０５）,其中以前两者为甚（Ｐ＜０．００５）。结论Ｄｙｒａｃｔ的远期疗效优于ＧＩＣ。     

激光处理牙釉质,牙本质与复合树脂的粘结研究

对脉冲钕玻璃激光辐射离体牙釉质，牙本质进行表面扫描电镜观察及测定辐射面与光固化复合树脂间粘结强度。结果表明：激光处理牙轴质表面呈云絮状熔融，与复合树脂粘结强度高于对照组，有非常显著性差异（Ｐ〈０．０１），低于酸蚀组，有显著性差异（Ｐ〈０．０５），激光处理牙本质表面呈重叠蜂窝状熔融，与复合树脂粘结强度高于对照组，有非常显著性差异（Ｐ〈０．０１），与酸蚀组无显著性差异（Ｐ〉０．０５），激光处理牙釉质及     

不同品牌玻璃离子水门汀氟释放的比较

目的：离体比较临床用不同品牌及固化方式的玻璃离子水门汀（ＧＩＣ）氟释放情况，为临床使用含氟充填材料防龋提供理论依据。方法：４种ＧＩＣ，分别为Ｓｈｏｆｕ，青浦，Ｃｈｅｍｆｉｌ３种化学固化型和ＶｉｔｒｅｍｅｒＴＭ光固化型ＧＩＣ，离子选择电极法测量材料在去离子水中氟释放量。结果：所有测试材料在实验期间都能在去离子水中持续释放氟，ＶｉｔｅｒｍｅｒＴＭ、Ｓｈｏｆｕ、Ｃｈｅｍｆｉｌ和青浦分别为（２１．１１±９．７６）μｇ、（８．０８±４．４３）μｇ、（６．５２±３．２８）μｇ，（１７．６７±６．９３）μｇ（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论：不同品牌及固化方式的ＧＩＣ氟释放能力不同，树脂基因引入玻璃离子水门汀并不影响其氟释放能力。     

酸蚀时间对树脂加强型玻璃离子粘结性能的影响

目的 比较光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀和复合树脂在几种粘结条件下，不同酸蚀时间后的粘结强度，探求减少釉质脱钙的粘结方法。方法 120颗因正畸拔除的健康双尖牙分成8组，酸蚀30秒或90秒后在几种条件下(干燥／被水或唾液潮湿)粘结脱槽，做冷热循环实验后，测剪切强度。结果 复合树脂酸蚀90秒较酸蚀30秒的粘接强度明显增强；光固化树脂玻璃在几种粘接条件下酸蚀90秒和酸蚀30秒粘接强度无明显区别，水潮湿组粘接强度最高。结论 复合树脂可通过延长酸蚀时间增加粘接强度；光固化树脂玻璃酸蚀30秒足够，延长酸蚀时闻不能增加粘接强度，白白造成釉质丢失。     

玻璃离子水门汀修复牙颈部磨损和楔形缺损的临床疗效

玻璃离子水门汀修复牙颈部磨损和楔形缺损的临床疗效岳玲，侯本祥，吴海波，肖明振西安第四军医大学口腔医学院（７１００３２）贵阳市口腔医院（５５００００）玻璃离子水门汀（Ｇｌａｓｓｉｏｎｏｍｅｒｃｅｍｅｎｔ，简称ＧＩＣ）对牙齿具有化学粘结住、边缘密封性良好...     

纤维连接蛋白促进牙周组织再生的细胞学研究

本实验利用体外细胞培养技术和ＭＴＴ比色性观察了纤维连接蛋白（ＦＮ）对牙周韧带细胞（ＰＤＬＣ）和牙龈成纤维细胞（ＧＦ）作用的不同生物学效应。结果显示，ＦＮ对两种细胞均有促进增殖的作用；ＦＮ在浓度为０．０４４μｍｏｌ／Ｌ时．对ＰＤＬＣ作用非常显著（Ｐ＜０．０１）．而在浓度为０．０８９～０．１７８μｍｏｌ／Ｌ时，对ＧＦ才有明显促进增殖的作用（Ｐ＜０．０１）。提示ＰＤＬＣ比ＧＦ对ＦＮ的刺激反应更敏感，因此，在牙周再生初期，若局部ＦＮ适量，可促使ＰＤＬＣ优先占据根面并增殖、分化，进而形成新附     

粘结剂使用方式对全酸蚀树脂水门汀与牙本质粘结性能影响的研究

目的评价粘结剂的3种不同使用方式（不使用粘结剂,粘结剂不固化及粘结剂固化10 s）对全酸蚀树脂水门汀与牙本质间粘结性能的影响。方法新鲜拔除的无龋人第三磨牙45颗,随机分为9组（n=5）,流水降温下磨除冠部牙釉质,制备标准牙本质粘结面,酸蚀冲洗后表面按全酸蚀粘结技术处理,牙本质粘结剂处理方式按设计进行,然后与3种全酸蚀树脂水门汀（Rely X ARC、Calibra、VariolinkⅡ）粘结并测试微拉伸粘结强度,用扫描电镜观察粘结界面。结果对于3种全酸蚀树脂水门汀,不使用粘结剂组未测得粘结强度;粘结剂不固化组及粘结剂固化10 s组均获得较为满意的粘结强度,不固化组的微拉伸粘结强度（15.534±2.099;22.827±6.968;10.736±3.199）显著高于粘结剂固化10 s组（13.476±2.710;14.076±5.165;7.736±3.052）（P〈0.05）。结论①全酸蚀树脂水门汀应结合粘结剂同时使用。②牙本质涂布粘结剂后不单独固化可显著提高全酸蚀树脂水门汀与牙本质的粘结强度。     

An in vitro study on restoring bond strength of a GIC to saliva contaminated enamel under unrinse condition

OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to find a method of restoring the tensile bond strength of glass ionomer cement (GIC) to saliva contaminated enamel under unrinse condition. METHODS: One hundred and thirty human non-carious permanent teeth were divided into two major groups. Either treatment with air drying, acetone, polyacrylic acid, maleic acid, tartaric acid, Scotchbond primer or no treatment at all was applied to both clean and saliva contaminated enamel surfaces prior to GIC placement. Samples were debonded in tension after 7 days of storage in water using a universal testing machine. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA, Tukey's studentized range test and Wilcoxon's rank sums test to determine the significance of the difference of tensile bond strengths within and between the two major groups. RESULTS: Bond strength of GIC to clean enamel was 2.46+/-0.79 MPa while the bond strength of GIC to wet contaminated enamel was significantly reduced to 1.28+/-0.32 MPa (p<0.01). However, the bond strengths were restored when the contaminated enamel surfaces were air-dried (2.19+/-0.38 MPa) or applied with either maleic acid (2.80+/-0.63 MPa) or Scotchbond primer (2.13+/-0.65 MPa) before placing GIC over the enamels. CONCLUSIONS: Air drying, or application of maleic acid or Scotchbond primer to the contaminated enamel without rinsing prior to GIC placement can restore the tensile bond strength to a level similar to that of non-contaminated control.     

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。     

Microleakage of indirect inlays placed on different kinds of glass ionomer cement linings

The objective of this study is to compare the marginal seal of Class II cavities restored with indirect inlays constructed on glass ionomer cement linings having different curing properties. Also the effect of acid-etching of these liners on microleakage was investigated. Mesio-occlusal and disto-occlusal cavities in 80 extracted human molars having the cervical floor below the cementoenamel junction were prepared (n:160). Half of the preparations were restored with Ceramco II porcelain and the rest with SR-Isosit resin inlay material. Liners as light curing Ionoseal light+chemically curing LCL 8 and Zionomer and chemically curing Ketac-Bond glass ionomer cements (GICs) were used. On mesial preparations GICs were acid-etched but were not on distal preparations. All inlays were cemented with Ultrabond composite material. After thermocycling the teeth were placed in a basic fuchsin dye solution for 24 h, then each tooth was sectioned. By using a stereomicroscope the extent of marginal leakage was scored and statistically evaluated. Microleakage was observed beneath all GIC linings and was more extensive between light curing GIC/dentine interface. By acid-etching of GICs the microleakage between GIC/dentine interface was increased significantly. Whether acid-etching was applied or not a significantly increased microleakage was recorded between chemically curing GIC/composite interfaces. Although the marginal microleakage was witnessed in both inlays, it appeared that porcelain inlays provided a better marginal seal, in comparison to SR-Isosit inlays.     

Shear bond strength of chemical and light-cured glass ionomer cements bonded to resin composites

A bond between glass ionomer cements (GIC) and resin composites is desirable for the success of the ‘sandwich’ restoration. Chemically cured glass ionomer cements have been the traditional materials used in this technique since its development, but etching the GIC was necessary to obtain a bond to the composite facing. Producing a very smooth GIC surface has aided in better determining the magnitude of the chemical bond between glass ionomers and resin composites. Shear testing of bonded specimens has revealed that chemical bonding is minimal (0.21 MPa) in conventional glass ionomers, but does exist (4.92 MPa) between GIC and resin composite regardless of the filler content (microfilled vs hybrid) of the composite. Thermal stressing affects the bond to resin-modified glass ionomers, but has no significant effect on self-cured cements. Of all combinations tested, Vitremer/Scotchbond/Silux Plus showed the highest mean shear bond strength. Based on the clinical need for an adhesive bond between GIC liner/base and resin composite, the resin-modified glass ionomer would appear to be the material of choice.     

Effect of smear layer deproteinization with HOCl solution on the dentin bonding of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements

The effect of smear layer-deproteinizing pretreatment using hypochlorous acid (HOCl) on the micro-shear bond strengths (μSBS) of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (GIC) to dentin was investigated and compared with demineralizing pretreatment with polyacrylic acid (PAA). Three GICs: Fuji IX GP Extra (restorative conventional GIC), GC Fuji II LC EM (restorative resin-modified GIC), and GC Fuji Luting EX (luting resin-modified GIC), were used. One hundred fifty human molars were divided into groups (n = 10) according to the cements and dentin pretreatments; no pretreatment (control), 10 s PAA pretreatment, and HOCl pretreatment for 5, 15, or 30 s. After 24 h, μSBS was tested and the data were statistically analyzed using a two-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey's post-hoc test. HOCl pretreatment significantly increased μSBS of conventional GIC compared to the control group. For resin-modified restorative GIC, 5 s HOCl deproteinization significantly increased μSBS, while longer application times did not. There was no significant difference between HOCl-pretreated and control groups of resin-modified luting GIC. PAA pretreatment increased the μSBS of all cements significantly. In conclusion, smear layer deproteinization with HOCl can enhance the dentin bonding of conventional GIC. However, the residual radicals may adversely affect the polymerization of resin-modified GICs.     

A comparison between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cement in orthodontics

In the past orthodontic band cementation has relied heavily on mechanically retentive cements such as zinc phosphate luting agents. The clinical performance of a glass ionomer cement (GIC), a chemically retentive cement, was evaluated against a conventional zinc phosphate cement (ZP). The recementation values for ZP were significantly higher over a 2-year treatment period than those of GIC. Failures between cement and enamel, and cement and stainless steel were noted for the ZP. Glass ionomer cement had significantly better retentive strength to enamel than to band material. Moisture contamination does not appear to be a problem in orthodontic band cementation with glass ionomer cement.     

Resin-modified glass ionomer, modified composite or conventional glass ionomer for band cementation?--an in vitro evaluation

The aims of this study were to compare the mean shear-peel bond strength and predominant site of bond failure of micro-etched orthodontic bands cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC; Fuji Ortho LC or 3M Multi-Cure), a modified composite or a conventional GIC. The survival time of bands was also assessed following simulated mechanical stress in a ball mill. One hundred and twenty molar bands were cemented to extracted human third molars. Eighty bands (20 cemented with each cement) were used to assess the debonding force and 40 bands (10 cemented with each cement) were used to determine survival time. The specimens were prepared in accordance with the manufacturers' instructions for each cement. After storage in a humidor at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, the shear debonding force was assessed for each specimen using a Nene M3000 testing machine with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The predominant site of band failure was recorded visually for all specimens as either at the band/cement or cement/enamel interface. Survival time was assessed following application of mechanical stress in a ball mill. There was no significant difference in mean shear-peel bond strength between the cement groups (P = 0.816). The proportion of specimens failing at each interface differed significantly between cement groups (P < 0.001). The predominant site of bond failure for bands cemented with the RMGIC (Fuji Ortho LC) or the modified composite was at the enamel/cement interface, whereas bands cemented with 3M Multi-Cure failed predominantly at the cement/band interface. Conventional GIC specimens failed mostly at the enamel/cement interface. The mean survival time of bands cemented with either of the RMGICs or with the modified composite was significantly longer than for those cemented with the conventional GIC. The findings indicate that although there appears to be equivalence in the mean shear-peel bond strength of the band cements assessed, the fatigue properties of the conventional GIC when subjected to simulated mechanical stress seem inferior to those of the other cements for band cementation.     

A bond strength study of luted castable ceramic restorations

Accurate intracoronal castings can be produced using a castable ceramic--DICOR--for which there is a need to identify a suitable luting cement. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the bond strength of three glass-ionomer luting cements and one resin cement to treated and untreated DICOR, enamel, and dentin surfaces. Forty "cerammed" DICOR specimens were assigned to four groups: (1-3) grit-blasting and bonding to each of the three glass-ionomer cements; and (4) acid-etching, silane coating, and bonding to the resin cement. Seventy enamel specimens were assigned to seven groups: (1-3) no etching and bonding to each of the glass-ionomer cements; (4-7) acid-etching and bonding to the glass-ionomer cements and the resin cement. Seventy dentin specimens were assigned to seven groups: (1-4) bonding to each of the three glass-ionomer cements and the resin cement; (5-7) polyacrylic acid preconditioning and bonding to each of the three glass-ionomer cements. The mean resin cement bond strengths (MN/m2) to DICOR (9.4) and to etched enamel (10.7) were significantly greater (p less than 0.01) than those of the glass-ionomer cements (DICOR, 0.8-1.2; enamel, 0.4-0.9). Preconditioning of enamel and dentin significantly increased (p less than 0.05) the bond strengths to the glass-ionomer cements. The mean bond strength of the resin cement to untreated dentin (4.3) was significantly higher (p less than 0.05) than the glass-ionomer bond strengths to untreated dentin (1.0-1.7) and to preconditioned dentin (2.1-3.3). The high bond strengths achieved with the resin cement are encouraging. Selected surface treatment of DICOR, enamel, and dentin prior to luting should be clinically useful.     

Nano-cellulose Reinforced Glass Ionomer Restorations: An In Vitro study

ObjectiveVarious modifications in formulation of glass ionomer cements (GICs) have been made in order to improve the clinical performance of these restorations. The aim of this work was to evaluate the microleakage and microshear bond strength (μSBS) of bacterial cellulose nanocrystal (BCNC)–modified glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in primary dentition.MethodsA total number of 60 freshly extracted primary molar teeth were selected. Half of the samples were used for μSBS testing (in 2 groups, n = 15). In group 1, conventional GIC (CGIC) of Fuji IX (GC) was placed in cylindrical molds on dentinal surfaces. In group 2, CGIC of Fuji IX containing 1% wt of BCNCs was used. μSBS was evaluated using a universal testing machine. In another part of the study, microleakage of class V restorations was assessed according to the mentioned groups (n = 15). The sectioned samples were observed under stereomicroscope, and microleakage scores were recorded. SPSS version 16.0 (SPSS), independent samples t test, and Mann–Whitney U test were used for statistical analysis at a significance level of P < .05.ResultsResults showed statistically significant differences between the μSBS of CGIC and modified GIC groups (P < .0001). The BCNC-modified GIC group recorded significantly higher bond strength values (3.51 ± 0.033 vs 1.38 ± 0.034 MPa). Also, microleakage scores of CGIC and BCNC-modified GIC restorations were not significantly different (P = .57).ConclusionsBased on our findings, it was concluded that incorporating BCNCs (1% wt) into the CGIC of Fuji IX significantly increased the μSBS to the dentin structure of the primary teeth.     

Glass ionomer cements used as fissure sealants with the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach: review of literature

AIM: To review the success of newer, more-viscous aesthetic conventional glass ionomer cements (GICs), that have been marketed specifically for the atraumatic restorative (ART) technique or approach, when used as pit and fissure sealants. As part of this approach, enamel fissures adjacent to the ART restorations are conditioned with poly (acrylic) acid (PAA) and then usually sealed with a GIC, using the finger-press method. RESULTS: The newer GICs appear in vitro to penetrate adequately and seal occlusal fissures in permanent molar teeth, and clinical studies of the ART approach over three years have found sealant retention (full and partial) to be approximately 70%, with fissure caries approximately 0-4%. In two studies, fissure caries was significantly reduced in sealed as compared with unsealed teeth over three years. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results appear to be better with the newer than with earlier conventional GIC products, the ART studies have generally involved populations at low-risk to caries, and further improvements in the mechanical properties of the cements are required for optimal long-term clinical success. Etching the enamel fissures with phosphoric acid, instead of conditioning with PAA, before GIC sealant placement warrants clinical investigation.