...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of dentistry >Evaluation of micro-tensile bond strength of caries-affected human dentine after three different caries removal techniques
【24h】

Evaluation of micro-tensile bond strength of caries-affected human dentine after three different caries removal techniques

机译:三种不同的龋齿去除技术对龋齿影响的人类牙本质微拉伸粘合强度的评估

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

Objective: This study evaluated the effect that different techniques for removing dental caries had on the strength of the microtensile bond to caries-affected human dentine created by three bonding agents. Materials and methods: Forty-five human molar teeth containing carious lesions were randomly divided into three groups according to the technique that would be used to remove the caries: a conventional bur, an Er:YAG laser or a chemo-mechanical Carisolv? gel (n = 15). Next, each of the three removal-technique groups was divided into three subgroups according to the bonding agents that would be used: Clearfil? SE Bond, G-Bond?, or Adper? Single Bond 2 (n = 5). Three 1 mm 2 stick-shaped microtensile specimens from each tooth were prepared with a slow-speed diamond saw sectioning machine fitted with a diamond-rim blade (n = 15 specimens). For each removal technique one dentine sample was analysed using scanning electron microscopy. Results: There were statistically significant differences in the resulting tensile strength of the bond among the techniques used to remove the caries and there were also statistically significant differences in the strength of the bond among the adhesive systems used. The etch-and-rinse adhesive system was the most affected by the technique used to remove the caries; of the three techniques tested, the chemo-mechanical removal technique worked best with the two-step self etch adhesive system. Conclusion: The bond strength values of the etch-and-rinse adhesive system were affected by the caries removal techniques used in the present study. However, in the one- and two-step self etch adhesive systems, bond strength values were not affected by the caries removal techniques applied. While a chemo-mechanical caries removal technique, similar to Carisolv?, may be suggested with self etch adhesive systems, in caries removal techniques with laser, etch-and-rinse systems might be preferred. Clinical significance: Caries removal methods may lead to differences in the characteristics of dentine surface. Dentine ultra structure generally affects the bonding of adhesive materials commonly used in restorative dentistry. Whereas etch-and-rinse system, like the ones used in the present study, are affected by these changes, the self etch systems are not affected. Hence, clinicians may opt for caries removal methods and systems appropriate for each patient and practice.
机译:目的:本研究评估了三种去除龋齿的不同技术对由三种粘合剂产生的与龋齿影响的人类牙本质的微张力键强度的影响。材料和方法:根据用于去除龋齿的技术,将45颗含有龋齿的人类臼齿随机分为三组:常规bur,Er:YAG激光或化学机械Carisolv?凝胶(n = 15)。接下来,根据要使用的粘合剂,将三个去除技术组中的每一个分为三个子组:Clearfil? SE Bond,G-Bond?或Adper?单键2(n = 5)。用装有金刚石轮缘刀片的慢速金刚石锯切片机制备每个牙齿的三个1 mm 2棒状微拉伸试样(n = 15个试样)。对于每种去除技术,使用扫描电子显微镜分析一个牙本质样品。结果:在用于去除龋齿的技术之间,所得粘合的抗张强度在统计学上有显着差异,并且在所使用的粘合剂体系之间,粘合强度在统计学上也有显着差异。蚀刻和冲洗粘合剂系统受去除龋齿的技术影响最大。在测试的三种技术中,化学机械去除技术在两步自蚀刻胶粘剂系统中效果最好。结论:本研究中使用的龋齿去除技术影响了蚀刻和冲洗粘合系统的粘合强度值。但是,在一步和两步自蚀刻粘合剂系统中,粘结强度值不受所用龋齿去除技术的影响。虽然建议采用自蚀刻粘合剂系统的化学机械龋齿去除技术类似于Carisolv ?,但在采用激光的龋齿去除技术中,蚀刻和冲洗系统可能是首选。临床意义:龋齿清除方法可能会导致牙本质表面特征的差异。牙本质的超微结构通常会影响修复牙科中常用的粘合材料的粘合。尽管蚀刻和冲洗系统(如本研究中使用的系统)受这些更改的影响,但自蚀刻系统不受影响。因此,临床医生可以选择适合每个患者和实践的龋齿去除方法和系统。

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