首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Conservative Dentistry >Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of sixth- and seventh-generation bonding agents with varying pH – An in vitro study
【24h】

Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of sixth- and seventh-generation bonding agents with varying pH – An in vitro study

机译:不同pH - 体外研究的第六和第七代粘合剂剪切粘合强度的比较评价 - 体外研究

获取原文

摘要

Introduction: To compare and evaluate the shear bond strength of sixth- and seventh-generation bonding agents with varying pH – an in vitro study. Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted human premolar teeth were collected and cleaned and polished with pumice and water. The root portion of teeth was resected, and only the coronal portion was embedded in the cold-cure acrylic resin. The labial surface of mounted teeth was prepared with a high-speed handpiece using #245 carbide bur. The samples prepared were divided into four groups, with 20 specimens in each group: Group A: Sixth-generation bonding agent, Adper Prompt L-Pop (APLP) (3M ESPE) Group B: Sixth-generation bonding agent, Xeno III (X III) (Dentsply) Group C: Seventh-generation bonding agent, Adper Easy One (AEO) (3M ESPE) Group D: Seventh-generation bonding agent, Xeno IV (X IV) (Dentsply). Tooth surface were rinsed and dried, and bonding agents were applied on tooth surface. Composite resin (Z-350 XT, 3M ESPE) was placed in a two-layer increment on tooth and was light cured. Specimens were subjected to the universal testing machine in a compression mode force at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min keeping blade parallel to the adhesive–dentin interface. Shear force required to debond the specimen was recorded in megapascal. The data obtained were analyzed statistically using ANOVA and post hoc test. Results: AEO (pH = 2.3, Group C seventh generation) showed higher bond strength, and pH values did not influence the shear bond strength significantly in the tested adhesive systems. Conclusion: The pH values did not influence the shear bond strength significantly in the tested adhesive systems. ADPER EASY ONE (pH= 2.3, GROUP C Seventh Generation) showed higher bond strength followed by XENO IV(pH = 2.1, GROUP D), XENO III (pH = 1.5, GROUP B) on dentinal surface ,where as ADPER PROMPT L POP (pH =0.7 to 1 Sixth Generation, GROUP A) showed lower bond strength.
机译:介绍:比较和评价和评价具有不同pH的第六和第七代结合剂的剪切粘合强度 - 体外研究。材料和方法:用浮石和水清洗并抛光八十次提取的人磨牙牙齿。切除牙齿的根部,并且仅将冠状部分嵌入冷固化丙烯酸树脂中。使用#245碳化物毛孔使用高速手机制备安装牙齿的唇表面。将制备的样品分为四组,每组20种样品:A组:第六代粘合剂,Adper提示L-Pop(APLP)(3MESPE)组B:第六代粘合剂,Xeno III(x III)(抑制)C组:第七代粘合剂,Adper容易一个(AEO)(3MESPE)组D:第七代粘合剂,Xeno IV(x IV)(抑制)。冲洗牙表面并干燥,并在牙齿表面上施加键合剂。复合树脂(Z-350 XT,3M ESPE)以双层齿置于牙齿上,并进行了光固化。以1mm / min保持叶片平行于粘合剂 - 牙本质界面的十字头速度,在压缩模式力下进行通用试验机的普通试验机。剥夺试样所需的剪切力被记录在Megapascal中。使用ANOVA和后HOC测试进行统计分析所获得的数据。结果:AEO(pH = 2.3,第4组第七代)显示出更高的粘合强度,pH值在测试的粘合剂系统中没有显着影响剪切粘合强度。结论:在测试的粘合剂系统中,pH值显着影响剪切粘合强度。 Adper容易一个(pH = 2.3,第C第七代)显示出更高的粘合强度,然后是牙本质表面上的Xeno IV(pH = 2.1,组D),Xeno III(pH = 1.5,B组),在其中Adper提示L流行(pH = 0.7至1第六代,A组)显示较低的粘合强度。

著录项

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