首页> 外文期刊>The journal of adhesive dentistry >Microtensile bond strength of self-etching adhesives to ground and unground enamel.
【24h】

Microtensile bond strength of self-etching adhesives to ground and unground enamel.

机译:自蚀刻胶粘剂对已研磨和未研磨搪瓷的微拉伸强度。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the bond strength of two self-etching primers (SEP) to ground and unground enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-two bovine incisors were used in this study. The buccal enamel surface of 36 teeth was ground flat to resemble freshly cut enamel. The rest of the teeth were left intact. Two SEPs--Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray (CSE) and Prompt L-Pop (3M ESPE) (LP)--and a conventional adhesive system, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (3M ESPE) (SBMP) as a control, were used to bond a composite button to prepared and unprepared enamel. Microtensile test specimens were trimmed, resulting in a cylindrical cross-sectional area (0.21 mm2 to 0.47 mm2). These specimens were subjected to a tensile force at 1 mm/min until failure. Differences between adhesives and surface preparation were determined by two-way ANOVA. The samples were observed under SEM to evaluate the mode of failure. RESULTS: Bond strength values in MPa (SD) obtained from pooled data in descending order were: SBMP ground 44.54 (5.96), LP unground 42.97 (7.90), CSE unground 41.67 (11.28), LP ground 41.07 (12.07), CSE ground 38.56 (8.78), and SBMP unground 37.60 (9.55). No statistically significant differences were found (p = 0.5061) between surface preparation or adhesive systems. The mean in MPa (SD) of all the specimens that failed at the adhesive joint were: LP unground 47.13 (14.65), SBMP ground 45.28 (7.33), CSE unground 41.40 (11.07), SBMP unground 41.1 (10.04), CSE ground 39.96 (11.83), and LP ground 39.92 (15.45). No statistically significant differences were found (p = 0.5863). Failure occurred mainly at the adhesive interface. CONCLUSIONS: Surface preparation and adhesive treatment had no influence on resin composite microtensile bond strength to bovine enamel.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是评估两种自蚀刻底漆(SEP)与磨过的和未磨过的瓷釉的结合强度。材料与方法:本研究使用了72个牛切牙。将36颗牙齿的颊釉质表面打磨平整,类似于刚切下的釉质。其余牙齿保持完整。使用两个SEP——Clearfil SE Bond,Kuraray(CSE)和Prompt L-Pop(3M ESPE)(LP)以及传统的粘合剂体系Scotchbond Multi-Purpose(3M ESPE)(SBMP)作为对照将复合纽扣粘合到已准备和未准备的搪瓷上。修整微拉伸试样,得到圆柱形横截面积(0.21 mm2至0.47 mm2)。这些样品以1mm / min的速度经受拉力直至破坏。粘合剂和表面处理之间的差异通过双向方差分析确定。在SEM下观察样品以评估失效模式。结果:从合并数据中按降序获得的结合强度(MPa)为:SBMP接地44.54(5.96),LP未接地42.97(7.90),CSE未接地41.67(11.28),LP未接地41.07(12.07),CSE未接地38.56 (8.78)和SBMP跌破37.60(9.55)。在表面处理或粘合剂体系之间未发现统计学上的显着差异(p = 0.5061)。所有在粘合点失效的样品的MPa(SD)平均值为:LP未研磨47.13(14.65),SBMP研磨45.28(7.33),CSE未研磨41.40(11.07),SBMP未研磨41.1(10.04),CSE研磨39.96 (11.83)和LP地面39.92(15.45)。没有发现统计学上的显着差异(p = 0.5863)。故障主要发生在粘合剂界面。结论:表面处理和粘合处理对树脂复合材料与牛牙釉质的微拉伸粘合强度没有影响。

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