...
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of adhesive dentistry >Micro-raman assessment of the ratio of carbon-carbon double bonds of two adhesive systems cured with LED or halogen light-curing units.
【24h】

Micro-raman assessment of the ratio of carbon-carbon double bonds of two adhesive systems cured with LED or halogen light-curing units.

机译:用LED或卤素光固化单元固化的两个胶粘剂系统的碳-碳双键比率的显微拉曼评估。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

PURPOSE: the purpose of the study was to compare the ratio of carbon-carbon double bonds (RDB) of two adhesive systems cured by five different light-curing units (LCUs) using micro-Raman spectroscopy. materials and methods: ten samples of an etch-and-rinse (Excite), a two-step self-etching adhesive system (AdheSE) - ie, primer and bond mixed - and AdheSE Bond only were prepared and cured with one of the following LEDs: Elipar Freelight2; Bluephase; SmartLite; Coltolux, each for 10 s; or a conventional halogen Prismetics Lite for 10 s or 20 s. Micro-Raman spectra were obtained from uncured and cured samples of all three groups to calculate the RDB. Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA. RESULTS: the mean RDB values were 62% to 76% (Excite), 36% to 50% (AdheSE Primer+Bond) and 58% to 63% (AdheSE Bond). At 20 s, Prismetics Lite produced significantly higher RDB in Excite than the other LCUs and Prismetics Lite at 10 s (p < 0.05). Prismetics Lite at 20 s and Elipar produced comparable RDB values of AdheSE Bond and AdheSE Primer+Bond (p > 0.05). Excite showed significantly higher RDB values than AdheSE (p < 0.05) whilst AdheSE Bond showed significantly higher RDB than AdheSE Primer+Bond (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: the etch-and-rinse adhesive cured with the halogen LCU for 20 s gave higher conversion than LED LCUs or halogen for 10 s curing time. The highest intensity LED [Elipar] produced higher or comparable conversion compared to the lower intensity LED LCUs for the same curing time. The etch-and-rinse adhesive showed higher RDB than the self-etching adhesive system. The presence of the primer in the self-etching adhesive compromised polymerisation.
机译:目的:研究的目的是使用显微拉曼光谱法比较通过五个不同的光固化单元(LCU)固化的两个粘合剂体系的碳-碳双键(RDB)比率。材料和方法:制备了十个蚀刻和冲洗样品(Excite),两步自蚀刻粘合剂系统(AdheSE)(即混合了底漆和粘合剂)和AdheSE Bond,并使用以下方法之一进行固化LED:Elipar Freelight2;蓝相; SmartLite; Coltolux,每次持续10 s;或传统的卤素Prismetics Lite 10秒钟或20秒钟。从所有三个组的未固化和固化样品中获得显微拉曼光谱,以计算RDB。使用ANOVA对数据进行统计分析。结果:RDB的平均值为62%至76%(激发),36%至50%(AdheSE底漆+键)和58%至63%(AdheSE债券)。在20 s时,Prismetics Lite在10 s时在Excite中产生的RDB明显高于其他LCU和Prismetics Lite(p <0.05)。 Prismetics Lite在20 s和Elipar上产生的AdheSE Bond和AdheSE Primer + Bond的RDB值相当(p> 0.05)。 Excite的RDB值显着高于AdheSE(p <0.05),而AdheSE Bond的RDB显着高于AdheSE Primer + Bond(p <0.05)。结论:用卤素LCU固化20 s的蚀刻和冲洗粘合剂比LED LCU或卤素固化10 s的转化率更高。在相同的固化时间下,与较低强度的LED LCU相比,最高强度的LED [Elipar]产生了更高或相当的转化率。蚀刻和冲洗粘合剂显示出比自蚀刻粘合剂体系更高的RDB。自蚀刻粘合剂中底漆的存在损害了聚合。

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