首页> 外文期刊>Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science >Single blinded in-vitro study comparing microleakage between CAD/CAM crowns milled out of feldspathic ceramic and resin nano ceramic, cemented with three resin cements
【24h】

Single blinded in-vitro study comparing microleakage between CAD/CAM crowns milled out of feldspathic ceramic and resin nano ceramic, cemented with three resin cements

机译:单盲体外研究比较了用三种树脂粘固剂粘合的长石和陶瓷纳米树脂磨制而成的CAD / CAM牙冠之间的微渗漏

获取原文
       

摘要

Background : Studies on microleakage of Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) crowns are abundant. However many of them are inconclusive, especially those using self adhesive cements . Aims: To compare the microleakage between CAD/CAM crowns milled out of feldspathic ceramic and resin nano ceramics, cemented with three resin cements. Materials and Methods : Crown preparation was made on 54 extracted human premolars. Impressions were captured optically using CEREC 3D machine intraoral camera, and crowns were milled from feldspathic ceramic (CEREC? Blocs PC, VITA) and resin nano ceramic (Lava? Ultimate CAD/CAM Restorative, 3M ESPE) blocks. The crowns were then cemented with three cements (n = 9); RelyX? U200 Self-Adhesive Resin Cement (3M ESPE); NX3 Nexus ? cement with two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Kerr Corporation) or three/multistep etch-and-rinse resin cement, Variolink? II/Syntac Classic (Ivoclar Vivadent). The specimens were kept in water for 24 hours, thermocycled, and then soaked in methylene blue dye for 24 hours, before being sectioned mesiodistally. Microleakage was assessed using a fivepoint scale using stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis of the data was carried out using ONEWay ANOVA. Results: CEREC? Blocs PC crowns showed significantly less microleakage (p 0.001) compared to Lava? Ultimate. RelyX? U200 showed significantly lower microleakage (p 0.001) compared to other cements. Combination of Lava? Ultimate crown cemented with RelyX? U200 showed the least microleakage (p 0.001 ) . Conclusions: The microleakage scores were affected by the types of crown and cements.
机译:背景技术:计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制造(CAD / CAM)牙冠的微渗漏研究非常丰富。但是,它们中的许多是不确定的,尤其是使用自粘水泥的那些。目的:比较用长石质陶瓷磨制的CAD / CAM牙冠和用三种树脂胶粘剂粘合的树脂纳米陶瓷之间的微渗漏。材料和方法:对54颗提取的人前磨牙进行冠冠制备。使用CEREC 3D机器口腔摄像头以光学方式捕获印记,然后用长石质陶瓷(CEREC?Blocs PC,VITA)和树脂纳米陶瓷(Lava?Ultimate CAD / CAM Restorative,3M ESPE)块研磨冠。然后用三种胶粘剂固结牙冠(n = 9); RelyX? U200自粘树脂水泥(3M ESPE); NX3 Nexus?带有两步蚀刻和冲洗粘合剂(Kerr Corporation)或三步/多步蚀刻和冲洗树脂粘合剂的水泥,Variolink? II / Syntac经典版(Ivoclar Vivadent)。将样品在水中放置24小时,进行热循环,然后在近中切之前将其浸泡在亚甲基蓝染料中24小时。使用立体显微镜使用五点量表评估微渗漏。使用ONEWay方差分析进行数据的统计分析。结果:CEREC?与Lava?相比,Blocs PC牙冠的微渗漏显着减少(p <0.001)。最终。 RelyX?与其他水泥相比,U200的微渗漏显着降低(p <0.001)。熔岩的结合?最终冠与RelyX结合在一起? U200的微渗漏最少(p <0.001)。结论:微渗漏分数受牙冠和胶结物类型的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号