首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到19条相似文献,搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
目的 研究4种材料全冠修复体的边缘适合性,为临床修复体材料的选择提供参考依据。方法 本研究于2022年1—4月在内蒙古口腔颅颌面疾病研究重点实验室进行。将种植基台作为预备体,直接在基台表面采用失蜡铸造工艺制作钴铬合金和金合金全冠修复体各20个,分别记为铸造钴铬合金组和铸造金合金组;采用计算机辅助设计与制造(CAD/CAM)切削工艺制作二氧化锆和纯钛全冠修复体各20个,分别记为CAD/CAM二氧化锆组和CAD/CAM纯钛组。各组初步试戴并记录调磨全冠组织面达到完全就位的时间。使用体视显微镜和M2-cam软件观测各组全冠修复体的绝对边缘间隙。结果 各组调磨就位时间总的比较,差异有统计学意义(F=91.519,P <0.001)。其中,铸造钴铬合金组调磨就位时间[(14.1±2.6)min]最长,CAD/CAM二氧化锆组用时[(5.0±1.6)min]最短,差异均有统计学意义(均P <0.05)。各组绝对边缘间隙由小至大依次为CAD/CAM二氧化锆组[(12.19±4.11)μm]、CAD/CAM纯钛组[(18.46±4.65)μm]、铸造金合金组[(28.93±4.24)μm]...  相似文献   

2.
目的通过对传统失蜡铸造和激光熔覆两种技术制作的钴铬合金烤瓷冠以及浅凹型和直角肩台型两种牙体预备形态制作的激光熔覆技术烤瓷冠的边缘适合性进行比较,以探讨激光熔覆技术烤瓷冠的边缘适合性。方法选取上颌前磨牙30颗,随机分成3组,每组10颗,按烤瓷冠要求常规牙体预备。A、B组用浅凹型边缘,C组用直角肩台。A组为传统失蜡铸造钴铬合金烤瓷冠,B、C组为BEGO德贝尔激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠;3组全用聚羧酸锌水门汀粘结剂粘固,经环氧树脂包埋后,沿颊腭向中间剖开烤瓷冠和牙体,用金相显微镜及电子显微镜观察和测量各组的颊、腭侧冠边缘间隙的大小。结果 A组烤瓷冠的水平边缘间隙为79.61±11.45μm,垂直边缘间隙94.90±7.09μm,绝对边缘间隙114.94±8.60μm;B组激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠的水平边缘间隙67.76±9.20μm,垂直边缘间隙82.54±9.92μm,绝对边缘间隙105.35±9.84μm;C组激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠的水平边缘间隙72.72±9.03μm,垂直边缘间隙88.11±9.53μm,绝对边缘间隙102.48±9.15μm。B组与A组比较差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05);B、C组之间的差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。结论激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠边缘水平边缘间隙、垂直边缘间隙、绝对边缘间隙均小于120μm,均达到临床可接受的范围内。激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠比传统失蜡铸造钴铬合金烤瓷冠边缘适合性更好。牙体预备采用浅凹型(B组)和直角肩台型(C组)制作的激光熔覆技术钴铬合金烤瓷冠边缘适合性无明显差异。  相似文献   

3.
目的:通过体外模拟实验考察两种不同氧化钇含量的牙科氧化锆瓷与天然牙釉质的摩擦磨损性能。方法:选择两种不同氧化钇含量的牙科氧化锆瓷UpceraST(3mo1%Y2O3-ZrO2)与Upcera TT(3mo1%Y20-ZrO2+8mo1%Y2O3-ZrO2)在微摩擦磨损试验机上,人工唾液润滑下与天然牙釉质进行摩擦磨损实验。两种氧化锆瓷表面分别采用抛光和打磨处理。用激光共聚焦显微镜测量牙釉质磨斑宽度,扫描电子显微镜观察氧化锆瓷及牙釉质磨斑微观形貌。采用配对t检验进行统计学分析。结果:牙釉质与氧化钇含量相对较低的UpceraST对磨的磨斑宽度:抛光组474.2±18.0μm,打磨组581.5±32.7Win;牙釉质与氧化钇含量相对较高的UpceraTT对磨的磨斑宽度:抛光组476.8±33.7μm,打磨组591.3±55.7μm。不同氧化钇含量的氧化锆瓷采用相同的表面处理方式对牙釉质的磨耗无统计学差异(P〉0.05)。牙釉质磨斑宽度在不同表面处理组间差异有统计学意义(P〈0.01):牙釉质与抛光氧化锆瓷对磨的磨斑宽度值小于打磨组。结论:两种不同氧化钇含量的氧化锆瓷摩擦磨损性能相似;氧化锆瓷表面抛光可避免牙釉质过度磨损。与抛光氧化锆瓷对磨,牙釉质的磨损类型主要是疲劳磨损;与打磨氧化锆瓷对磨,牙釉质的磨损类型主要是磨粒磨损。提示临床在对充填体或修复体调磨后应进行抛光处理,以避免造成对颌天然牙的过度磨损。  相似文献   

4.
目的评价选择性激光熔融(selective laser melting,SLM)技术和常规失蜡(10st-wax,Lw)铸造技术制作钻铬合金烤瓷冠的适合性。方法将48颗尺寸统一的树脂代型编号后随机分为两组,每组24颗,分别采用SLM法和LW法制成钴铬合金烤瓷冠,用玻璃离子水门汀粘固于对应编号的树脂代型上,片切后用体视硅微镜测量烤瓷冠的适合性。结果SLM绀与LW组的边缘适合性分别为(25.04±5.42)μm、(27.40±6.34)μm,差异无统计学意义(t=-1.751,P=0.084);SLM纰与LW组的恰向适合性分别为(32.64±8.85)μm、(56.15±15.81)μm,差异有统计学意义(t=5.942,P=0.034);SLM组与LW组的内部适合性分别为(35.86±8.05)μm、(25.73±4.78)μm,差异有统计学意义(t=4.928,P=0.033)。结论采用SLM法和LW法制作的钴铬合金烤瓷冠,适合性均可满足临床需要,SLM法制作的钴铬合金烤瓷冠的袷向适合性和内部适合性优于LW法。  相似文献   

5.
目的比较不同抛光方法对钴铬合金离子析出的影响。方法本研究于2013年3—8月在福建医科大学附属口腔医院进行。制作30个钴铬合金试样,随机分为5组,分别为砂纸抛光组、镜面抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组和化学抛光组,每组6个试样。根据ISO10271:201l标准采用浸泡实验检测试样Co、cr离子的析出情况。检测腐蚀前的表面粗糙度和腐蚀前后表面形貌。结果镜面抛光组co、cr析出量之和小于橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组和化学抛光组(P〈0.05)。化学抛光组表面粗糙度最大(P〈0.05)。化学抛光组co、cr析出量及其总和均大于砂纸抛光组、镜面抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组(P〈0.05)。扫描电镜观察表明,砂纸抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、化学抛光组表面有明显的腐蚀痕迹。结论钴铬合金经镜面抛光可获得最好的表面形貌和抗腐蚀性能,化学抛光对钴铬合金表面形貌改善不大,其抗腐蚀性能最差。  相似文献   

6.
3种牙科铸造金属模拟唾液浸泡后粗糙度的变化   总被引:4,自引:1,他引:3  
目的:通过考察钴铬合金、镍铬合金以及纯钛在不同pH值人工唾液中浸泡后表面粗糙度的变化,研究3种常用牙科金属的耐腐蚀能力。方法:将3种金属的标准铸造试件逐级打磨抛光后。浸泡于pH值分别为7.0和5.6的人工唾液中。3个月后检测试件表面粗糙度,并用金相显微镜观察试件表面。采用SPSS11.0软件包对数据进行单因素方差分析及t检验。结果:pH=5.6的人工唾液浸泡后,3种材料表面粗糙度有显著差异,镍铬合金〉钴铬合金〉纯钛金属(P〈0.01)。pH=7.0的人工唾液浸泡后,镍铬合金表面粗糙度大于钴铬合金和纯钛(P〈0.01),但钴铬合金和纯钛之间无统计学差异(p〉0.05)。pH=5.6人工唾液浸泡组的镍铬合金和钴铬合金表面粗糙度大于pH=7.0组的同种材料(P〈0.01)。各试验组表面粗糙度大小与显微镜观察到的材料表面腐蚀程度一致。结论:纯钛在酸性和中性环境下均有较强的耐腐蚀性,钴铬合金、镍铬合金在酸性介质中的耐腐蚀性较差。3种金属的耐腐蚀性由大到小排列为:纯钛金属〉钴铬合金〉镍铬合金。  相似文献   

7.
目的比较铸造和切削钴铬合金与瓷的结合强度。 方法分别使用失蜡铸造法和计算机数字控制切削法制作钴铬合金试件(25 mm × 3 mm × 0.5 mm),在试件表面中心区域熔附8 mm × 3 mm × 1.1 mm的瓷,使用ISO 9693规定的三点弯曲测试对金瓷试件进行金瓷结合强度测定。使用佩有X线能谱分析的扫描电镜观察试件的显微特征,元素扩散以及开裂试件开裂模式、残留瓷面积分数。结合强度、残留瓷面积分数数据使用独立样本t检验进行统计学分析(α=0.05)。 结果铸造钴铬合金与瓷的结合强度为(31.46 ± 3.61)MPa,切削钴铬合金与瓷的结合强度为(31.74 ± 3.33)MPa,两组间差异没有统计学意义(t=-0.204,P= 0.738),三点弯曲测试后,铸造组和切削组所有开裂试件都为混合开裂模式,铸造组和切削组的残留瓷面积分数分别为0.32 ± 0.06和0.45 ± 0.08,两组间差异有统计学意义(t=-4.67,P<0.001),切削组合金表面比铸造组有更多的瓷残留。 结论铸造法和切削法制作的钴铬合金金瓷结合强度没有差异。  相似文献   

8.
目的:为评估不同的表面处理方式对树脂粘接剂和Y-TZP粘接强度的影响。方法:制作直径10mm,厚度0.7mm的盘状Y-TZP氧化锆试件60个,并在其表面上饰瓷,Vita VM9饰面瓷的厚度为1.5mm。所有试样分为6组,对照组不进行任何处理;涂层组-烧结前进行化学硅烷涂层(30-μm SiO2);打磨组-烧结前使用50-μm Al2O3进行空气打磨;激光组-Er:YAG激光组,Nd:YAG激光组,CO2激光组。试样制作完成后将复合树脂粘接到陶瓷上。应用万能试验机测量全瓷修复体与树脂的平均剪切粘接强度(MPa)。使用one-wayANOVA对表面处理方法的影响进行统计学分析,通过Tukey HSD检验进行多重比较(α=0.05)。结果:各组的平均剪切粘接强度(MPa)分别:对照组=14.3±0.8;涂层组=14.9±0.9;打磨组=20.6±1.0;Er:YAG激光组=26.1±1.5;Nd:YAG激光组=27.2±1.3;CO2激光组=26.6±1.2。不同的表面处理方法对复合树脂与全瓷修复体的剪切粘接强度的影响六组间差异有统计学意义(P〈0.01)。激光组、打磨组与对照组间差异有统计学意义,涂层组与对照组间差异无统计学意义。结论:硅烷涂层处理不能提高复合树脂与Y-TZP间的剪切粘接强度。空气打磨和激光照射能提高复合树脂与Y-TZP间的剪切粘接强度。  相似文献   

9.
目的 研究一种新的工程学真空镀膜技术-等离子喷涂技术对新型牙用烤瓷支架钴铬合金金瓷结合强度的影响.方法 用DA9-4钴铬合金制成金属棒以及金属片,并在金属试件上瓷前利用等离子喷涂技术在其表面形成一层Al2O3陶瓷薄膜,对其结构进行X射线衍射分析;金属棒与VMK95瓷粉烧结生成金瓷棒盘试件用于测定金瓷结合强度;金属片与VMK95瓷粉烧结形成金瓷复合体,分别观察金瓷界面的形貌及元素分布情况.结果 等离子喷涂镀膜处理后的金瓷结合强度(71.98±15.37Mpa)明显高于对照组(63.66±14.72MpaP<0.01).结论 等离子喷涂技术有改善新型牙用烤瓷支架钴铬合金金瓷结合强度的作用.  相似文献   

10.
目的:比较钴铬合金冠、钴铬烤瓷冠、铸瓷全冠和氧化锆全瓷冠的边缘适合性。方法:选取正畸拔除的第一前磨牙24颗,随机分成A:钴铬合金、B:钴铬烤瓷、C:铸瓷、D:氧化锆全冠共4组,常规备牙、印模后分别制作修复体,玻璃离子粘固后在体式显微镜下放大40倍测量修复体边缘在垂直和水平方向上与牙体组织边缘之间的间隙宽度,用SPSS11.5进行统计分析。结果:水浴前A、B、C、D组平均边缘垂直间隙宽度分别为(82.5±13.3)、(66.3±9.2)、(44.7±5.8)和(45.8±18.3)μm,除C组与D组间差异无统计学意义外,其他各组间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01);水浴后宽度分别为(101.8±9.5)、(80.1±9.8)、(52.8±6.6)和(53.0±8.1)μm,除C组与D组间差异无统计学意义外,其他各组间差异也均有统计学意义(P<0.001)。比较同组水浴前后A、B、C组有统计学差异,D组无统计学差异。样本颊舌向剖开后测得A、B、C、D组剖面冠边缘水平间隙宽度分别为(103.0±17.8)、(90.9±19.9)、(72.8±11.0)和(73.8±9.3)μm,除A组与C组、A组与D组间差异有统计学意义外,其他各组间差异均无统计学意义。结论:铸瓷和氧化锆全瓷冠的边缘适合性优于钴铬合金冠和钴铬烤瓷冠。  相似文献   

11.
Dental restorations made of zirconia are usually selectively adjusted chairside to eliminate occlusal or internal interferences that can impair the mechanical properties of ceramic framework material. Effects of polishing procedures on zirconia after chipping or simply glazing the monolithic zirconia restorations are not known. This study evaluated the effects of different surface treatment procedures--namely, glazing or grinding, finishing, and polishing regimens--on the flexural strength and fracture toughness of a zirconia core material. Forty zirconia specimens were prepared and divided into two main groups (n = 20) according to the type of surface treatment (glazed or ground, finished, and polished). Each group was further divided into two subgroups (n = 10) according to type of mechanical test (flexural strength and fracture toughness). The roughness measurements were performed before mechanical testing. Qualitative evaluation of representative specimens of each subgroup was performed using SEM. The surface roughness mean (μm; ± standard deviations) recorded for the glazed specimens (0.94 ± 0.2) was significantly lower than that of the finished and polished group (3.01 ± 0.1) (P < 0.05). The glazed zirconia showed significantly higher flexural strength (385.4 ± 45.4 MPa) and fracture toughness (6.07 ± 1 MPa.m?) values than the ground, finished, polished zirconia (302.4 ± 47.6 MPa and 2.14 ± 0.5 MPa.m?) (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001 for flexural strength and fracture toughness, respectively). A smooth topographic pattern after glazing could not be obtained after finishing and polishing. Grinding, finishing, and polishing markedly decreased the flexural strength and fracture toughness of zirconia compared to the glazed groups.  相似文献   

12.
目的    比较临床上5种常用抛光方法对IPS e.max Press玻璃陶瓷调磨后表面粗糙度的影响。方法    选取临床常用修复材料IPS e.max Press玻璃陶瓷制作试件30个,随机分成6组(每组5个试件),分别为对照组(常规上釉)、砂石组(绿色碳化硅砂石+氧化铝白砂石依次混合打磨抛光)、松风组(松风Ceramaster精细烤瓷砂石抛光)、EVE组(EVE氧化锆砂石抛光)、道邦组(道邦弹性瓷砂石抛光)、3M组(3M Sof-LexTM抛光套装)。常规调磨后按照各自不同的整体抛光打磨方法分别对试件表面依次进行抛光,扫描电镜下观察各组抛光后试件的表面形态,检测各组抛光后试件的表面粗糙度Ra值。结果 扫描电镜下观察可见3M组和道邦组抛光后试件表面较为平整光滑,划痕较少,与对照组类似;而砂石组和松风组试件表面划痕明显并伴有明显的凹坑;EVE组划痕较少且划痕条纹较平整,方向一致,有少许凹痕较对照组明显。各组抛光后试件的表面粗糙度Ra值由小到大顺序排列为:3M组[(0.207 ± 0.016)μm]、对照组[(0.208 ± 0.015)μm]、道邦组[(0.216 ± 0.025)μm]、EVE组[(0.315 ± 0.017)μm]、松风组[(0.375 ± 0.030)μm]、砂石组[(0.379 ± 0.017)μm];砂石组、松风组、EVE组Ra值均明显大于对照组(均P < 0.05),而3M组、道邦组与对照组之间的差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。结论 5种抛光方法均能有效改善玻璃陶瓷表面粗糙度,不同抛光方法对IPS e.max Press玻璃陶瓷的抛光效果有一定的差异,以3M Sof-LexTM抛光套装抛光效果较佳。  相似文献   

13.
目的:振荡培养条件下比较氧化锆陶瓷和钛合金抛光后表面粗糙度的差异及变形链球菌在其表面的黏附能力。方法:制作氧化锆陶瓷和钛合金样本各6个。A组氧化锆陶瓷用EVE专用抛光轮高度抛光,B组钛合金原始铸件依次用粗砂纸、水砂纸(依次为200目、600目、800目、1000目、1200目、1500目、2000目)逐级磨光,再用抛光轮抛光。用表面粗糙度检测仪测量各组样本的表面粗糙度。将两组样本置于变形链球菌悬浮液中,37℃振荡培养条件下培养1h。荧光显微镜下计数黏附变形链球茵的数量,并通过扫描电子显微镜观察各样本的表面形貌。结果:A、B两组的表面粗糙度分别为(0.0548±0.027)μm、(0.0483±0.006)μm。变形链球菌在A、B两组样本表面的黏附数分别为4.2222±1.019、8.5417±2.208。经统计学分析,A、B两组表面粗糙度差异无显著性(P〉0.05),A组与B组样本变形链球菌黏附数差异有显著性(P〈0.05)。扫描电镜显示,氧化锆陶瓷抛光组试件表面散在少量细小孔隙,而钛合金抛光组试件表面未见少量细小空隙,但有较多裂隙和凹陷。结论:氧化锆陶瓷和钛合金抛光后表面能达到同样光滑,但钛合金表面比氧化锆陶瓷表面更容易黏附变形链球茵。  相似文献   

14.

Objective

To investigate the wear behavior of novel graded glass/zirconia materials and their abrasiveness to the antagonist relative to homogeneous zirconias (polished or glazed) and a glass-ceramic.

Methods

Graded glass/zirconia specimens were prepared by sintering with concurrent glass-infiltration of pre-sintered zirconia (3Y-TZP) with a polished or as-machined surface. Monolithic zirconia samples were sintered and their surfaces were polished or glazed (as-machined). Glass-ceramic samples were obtained and the surface polished. All specimens were subjected to chewing simulations with a steatite antagonist (r?=?3?mm) and a cyclic load of 50?N. Quantitative measurements of wear and roughness were performed on ceramics and antagonists for prescribed number of cycles. Damage sustained in ceramics and antagonists was analyzed by SEM.

Results

The polished zirconia presented little to no variation in wear depth (2?μm) and roughness (0.06?μm). Graded and glazed zirconia experienced a rapid increase in wear depth while the superficial glass layer was present (until 1000 cycles), but showed little variations afterwards — at 450k cycles ~15?μm for graded and 78?μm for glazed zirconia. The glass-ceramic presented the greatest wear depth (463?μm) and roughness (1.48?μm). Polished zirconia, polished graded zirconia and glazed zirconia yielded significantly lower volumetric wear (~3?mm3) of the antagonist than as-machined graded zirconia and glass-ceramic (~5?mm3).

Significance

Polished graded zirconia and polished zirconia presented little wear and roughness, as well as yielded reduced antagonist wear. Glassy materials are both more susceptible to wear and more abrasive to the antagonist relative to zirconia.  相似文献   

15.
目的 比较不同表面处理对Sirona CEREC Blocs陶瓷表面粗糙度的影响.方法 按照不同的表面处理方式将试件分为7组:对照组(A)、自身上釉组(B)、釉膏上釉组(C)、2组不同松风抛光方案组(D、E),2组不同EVE抛光方案组(F、G),测量试件表面处理后的粗糙度值,体视显微镜定性分析试件表面形貌.结果 各组粗糙度值依次为:A组(0.139±0.010)μ m、B组(0.129±0.006)μm、C组(0.090±0.029) μm、D组(0.145±0.009)μ m、E组(0.101±0.007)μ m、F组(0.172±0.016)μ m、G组(0.278±0.027)μ m;A组与C组、D组与E组、D组与G组、E组与F组、E组与G组及F组与G组之间均有显著性差异(P<0.05),A组与B组、C组与E组及D组与F组之间均无统计学差异(P>0.05):体视显微镜分析结果与粗糙度值分析结果一致.结论 釉膏上釉较其它表明处理方式效果好,不同的抛光工具对Sirona CEREC Blocs陶瓷的抛光效果不同,其中松风抛光工具抛光效果堪比釉膏上釉的效果.  相似文献   

16.
PURPOSEThe purpose of this study was to compare the surface roughness, phase transformation, and surface topography of dental zirconia with three different yttrium oxide compositions under same grinding and polishing conditions.MATERIALS AND METHODSThree zirconia disks (IPS e.max ZirCAD LT, MT, MT multi, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) were selected for experimental materials. Sixty-nine bar-shaped specimens were fabricated as 12.0 × 6.0 × 4.0 mm using a milling machine and glazing was conducted on 12.0 × 6.0 mm surface by same operator. With a custom polishing device, 12.0 × 6.0 mm surfaces were polished under same condition. Surface roughness (Ra[µm]) was measured before grinding (C), after grinding (G), and at every 3 steps of polishing (P1, P2, P3). X-ray diffraction and FE-SEM observation was conducted before grinding, after grinding, and after fine polishing (P3). Statistical analysis of surface roughness was performed using Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney-U test was used as a post hoc test (α = .05).RESULTSThere were no significant differences of surface roughness between LT, MT, and MM groups. In LT, MT, and MM groups, P3 groups showed significantly lower surface roughness than C groups. X-ray diffraction showed grinding and polishing didn''t lead to phase transformation on zirconia surface. In FE-SEM images, growths in grain size of zirconia were observed as yttrium oxide composition increases.CONCLUSIONPolished zirconia surface showed clinically acceptable surface roughness, but difference in yttrium oxide composition had no significant influence on the surface roughness. Therefore, in clinical situation, zirconia polishing burs could be used regardless of yttrium oxide composition.  相似文献   

17.
目的 探讨Al2O3喷砂处理对二氧化锆陶瓷表面粗糙度、元素构成及树脂粘接耐久能力的影响.方法 可切削二氧化锆陶瓷片试件60个经烧结、研磨、清洗后,30个试件表面在0.3 MPa压力下接受50 μm Al2O3颗粒喷砂处理20 s,形成喷砂后试件(另30个不喷砂试件为喷砂前试件).使用激光共聚焦显微镜对喷砂前、后的陶瓷表面粗糙度进行测量.使用X射线能谱仪对喷砂前、后的陶瓷表面元素成分进行定性定量分析.试件分为6组,每组10个:1、2组分别由喷砂前、后试件与常规树脂粘接剂(Duolink)粘接;3、4组分别由喷砂前、后试件分别与含磷酸酯类功能性单体的树脂粘接剂(Panavia F)粘接;5和6组分别由喷砂前、后试件经含磷酸酯类功能性单体的硅烷偶联剂(Clearfil Ceramic Primer)处理后与Panavia F粘接.各组试件分为两个亚组,分别经0、10 000次冷热循环后测量剪切粘接强度.使用单因素方差分析和独立样本t检验进行统计.结果 喷砂后陶瓷表面氧元素原子百分比[(65.03±1.48)%]显著低于喷砂前 [(75.85±1.61)%],锆元素原子百分比[(17.30±1.43)%]显著高于喷砂前[(9.62±0.29)%](P<0.001),同时表面粗糙度高于喷砂前(P<0.001).冷热循环降低了所有组粘接强度(P<0.001),其中1、2组试件在循环过程中全部脱落,3、5组粘接强度[(0.59±0.17)、(0.89±0.84)MPa]显著低于4、6组粘接强度[(14.63±3.03)、(16.64±1.90) MPa],6组粘接强度显著高于4组(P<0.001).所有试件粘接断裂模式均为陶瓷-粘接剂界面断裂.结论 Al2O3喷砂处理在增加二氧化锆陶瓷表面粗糙度和表面积的同时,也增加了表面锆元素的质量和原子百分比,从而提高了二氧化锆陶瓷与含磷酸酯类功能性单体的树脂粘接剂间的化学粘接耐久能力.
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the effect of Al2O3 particles sandblasting on the surface roughness, element composition and resin bond durability of zirconia ceramic. Methods Sixty 2.5 mm thick computer aided design and computer aided manufacture(CAD/CAM) zirconia ceramic (Vita Inceram YZ) plates were fired, polished and cleaned. Half of polished ceramic plates was sandblasted with 50 μm alumina particles at 0.3 MPa for 20 s. The surface roughness of polished and sandblasted ceramic surface were measured by 3D-laser scanning microscope, and the surface element weight and atom ratio of the ceramic surface were measured by energy disperse spectroscopy(EDS). Then polished and sandblasted ceramic plates were randomized into six groups. In Group 1 and 2 the polished and sandblasted ceramic plates were bonded irrespectively with conventional resin cement(DUOLINK) . In Group 3 and 4 the ceramic plates were bonded with resin cement containing MDP(Panavia F), In Group 5 and 6 the specimens were pretreated with silane coupler acitivated by MDP(Clearfil Ceramic Primer), then bond with Panavia F. The specimens of each test group were then divided into two subgroups, and to received shear test after 0 and 10 000 time thermal cycle. The data was analyzed by one-way ANOVA and independent t test. ResultsComparing with polishing, sandblasting reduced the oxygen atom and weight ratio of zirconia ceramic surface (P<0.001), and increased the zirconium atom and weight ratio (P<0.001), meanwhile increased the surface roughness (P<0.001). The bond strength between ceramic plates and resin cement in all test groups decreased after thermocycling (P<0.001). All specimen in test group 1 and 2 lost bond, and the bond strength of test group 3 and 5[(0.59±0.17), (0.89±0.84) MPa] were significantly lower than that of test group 4 and 6[(14.63±3.03), (16.64±1.90) MPa], and the bond strength of test group 6 were significanlty higher than that of test group 4. Conclusions Sandblasting improves durability of bond between zirconia ceramic and resin cement containing MDP, not only by increasing the roughness and area of ceramic surface, but also by changing its surface element composition to obtain more chemical bond.  相似文献   

18.
目的:研究牙色材料与天然牙本质之间磨损性能的匹配情况.方法:以牙本质为研究对象,以实验组高度抛光的聚合瓷、玻璃陶瓷、氧化锆为摩擦剂,模拟口腔环境,利用微摩擦磨损实验机,研究牙本质与不同材料之间的摩擦磨损性能.采用扫描电镜观察表面形貌,粗糙度仪测粗糙度,维氏硬度仪测表面硬度,电子天平测磨损量.结果:牙本质与3种材料粗糙度近似(P>0.05),硬度小于3种材料(P<0.05).牙本质与3种材料分别对磨后材料的磨损量大于牙本质对照组的磨损量(P<0.05),牙尖牙本质的磨损量与3种材料及牙本质的硬度值呈显著正相关关系(r =0.840).其中聚合瓷组的牙本质磨损量与对照组最接近.结论:不同材料对牙本质均会造成不同程度的磨损,聚合瓷具有与牙本质相近的耐磨性能.  相似文献   

19.
目的 比较不同抛光方法对钴铬合金离子析出的影响。方法 本研究于2013年3—8月在福建医科大学附属口腔医院进行。制作30个钴铬合金试样,随机分为5组,分别为砂纸抛光组、镜面抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组和化学抛光组,每组6个试样。根据ISO 10271:2011标准采用浸泡实验检测试样Co、Cr离子的析出情况。检测腐蚀前的表面粗糙度和腐蚀前后表面形貌。结果 镜面抛光组Co、Cr析出量之和小于橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组和化学抛光组(P < 0.05)。化学抛光组表面粗糙度最大(P < 0.05)。化学抛光组Co、Cr析出量及其总和均大于砂纸抛光组、镜面抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、电解抛光组(P < 0.05)。扫描电镜观察表明,砂纸抛光组、橡皮轮抛光组、化学抛光组表面有明显的腐蚀痕迹。结论 钴铬合金经镜面抛光可获得最好的表面形貌和抗腐蚀性能,化学抛光对钴铬合金表面形貌改善不大,其抗腐蚀性能最差。  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号