论文部分内容阅读
目的评价4种黏结剂对氧化锆全瓷嵌体边缘微渗漏的影响。方法选取2012年8月佛山市禅城区向阳医院口腔科新鲜拔除的上颌第三磨牙40颗,随机分为A、B、C、D组,每组10颗,制备Ⅴ类洞形。4组离体牙分别采用全酸蚀黏结剂Adper Singlebond2(A组)及自酸蚀黏结剂ClearFil SE Bond(B组)、Multilink Sprin(tC组)和Adper Easy One(D组)黏结氧化锆全瓷嵌体,修复后离体牙经冷热循环后行2%亚甲基蓝染色,根管显微镜下观察各组微渗漏程度并进行比较。结果在牙合壁,C组微渗漏明显高于A和B组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);但与D组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在龈壁,C组微渗漏明显高于其他3组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);而其他3组之间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论自酸蚀黏结剂ClearFil SE Bond和Adper Easy One的封闭能力较好,且较全酸蚀黏结剂操作简单方便,推荐临床使用。
Objective To evaluate the effect of four kinds of adhesives on marginal microleakage of zirconia ceramic inlays. Methods Forty fresh maxillary third molars extracted from Department of Stomatology, Xiangyang Hospital, Chancheng District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province in August 2012 were randomly divided into groups A, B, C and D, with 10 in each group. Four groups of isolated teeth were respectively treated with Adult Singlebond2 (group A) and ClearFil SE Bond (group B), Multilink Sprin (group tC) and Adper Easy One (group D) Porcelain inlay was repaired and the isolated teeth were subjected to 2% methylene blue staining after cooling and heating cycles. The degree of microleakage in each group was observed under a root canal microscope and compared. Results In the occlusal wall, the microleakage of group C was significantly higher than that of group A and B (P <0.05), but there was no significant difference between group C and group D (P> 0.05). In gingival wall, the microleakage of group C was significantly higher than that of the other three groups (P <0.05), while there was no significant difference among the other three groups (P> 0.05). Conclusion The self-etching adhesives ClearFil SE Bond and Adper Easy One have better sealing ability and are easier to operate than the all-acid etching adhesive. It is recommended to be used clinically.