Putri Noerpuspita, Ivo Krejci, Tissiana Bortolotto
{"title":"Marginal adaptation of two-step self-etch versus universal adhesives for Class V restorations: Effect of Er:YAG laser vs. bur prepared cavities.","authors":"Putri Noerpuspita, Ivo Krejci, Tissiana Bortolotto","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the in vitro effect of laser and bur preparation on marginal adaptation of Class V cavities restored with a 2-step self-etch and distinct universal one-component universal adhesives used in self-etching mode.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>96 Class V cavities were prepared with conventional burs or with an Er:YAG laser. Four universal self-etch (Unibond Extra Low Shrinkage, All Bond Universal, SKB-100 and Prime&Bond active) and a 2-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) that served as control were used to restore the cavities with direct composite. The percentages of continuous margins were evaluated by quantitative SEM analysis before and after a fatigue test consisting of 240,000 occlusal loads and 600 warm/cold thermal cycles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The marginal adaptation of bur prepared restorations was statistically superior to laser-prepared ones. Class V cavities restored with Clearfil SE Bond and the one-component self-etching universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active presented the highest and statistically similar percentages of continuous margins before and after loading under both bur and laser cavity preparation. The lowest percentages of continuous margins were observed in the groups restored with the low shrinking adhesive (Unibond ELS), with medians of 49 and 21 for bur and laser prepared cavities after loading.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Class V cavities presented smoother and higher percentages of continuous margins when prepared by bur rather than by laser. The 2-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond and 1-step self-etch universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active showed a comparable marginal performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":7538,"journal":{"name":"American journal of dentistry","volume":"37 1","pages":"29-34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the in vitro effect of laser and bur preparation on marginal adaptation of Class V cavities restored with a 2-step self-etch and distinct universal one-component universal adhesives used in self-etching mode.
Methods: 96 Class V cavities were prepared with conventional burs or with an Er:YAG laser. Four universal self-etch (Unibond Extra Low Shrinkage, All Bond Universal, SKB-100 and Prime&Bond active) and a 2-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) that served as control were used to restore the cavities with direct composite. The percentages of continuous margins were evaluated by quantitative SEM analysis before and after a fatigue test consisting of 240,000 occlusal loads and 600 warm/cold thermal cycles.
Results: The marginal adaptation of bur prepared restorations was statistically superior to laser-prepared ones. Class V cavities restored with Clearfil SE Bond and the one-component self-etching universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active presented the highest and statistically similar percentages of continuous margins before and after loading under both bur and laser cavity preparation. The lowest percentages of continuous margins were observed in the groups restored with the low shrinking adhesive (Unibond ELS), with medians of 49 and 21 for bur and laser prepared cavities after loading.
Clinical significance: Class V cavities presented smoother and higher percentages of continuous margins when prepared by bur rather than by laser. The 2-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond and 1-step self-etch universal adhesives All Bond Universal and Prime&Bond active showed a comparable marginal performance.
目的:比较体外激光制备和车针制备对使用双步自酸蚀和不同的单组分通用粘合剂自酸蚀模式修复的 V 类牙洞边缘适应性的影响。方法:使用传统车针或 Er:YAG 激光制备 96 个 V 类牙洞。使用四种通用自酸蚀粘接剂(Unibond Extra Low Shrinkage、All Bond Universal、SKB-100 和 Prime&Bond active)和一种作为对照的双步骤自酸蚀粘接剂(Clearfil SE Bond)用直接复合材料修复龋洞。在进行 240,000 次咬合负荷和 600 次冷热循环的疲劳测试前后,通过 SEM 定量分析对连续边缘的百分比进行了评估:结果:从统计学角度来看,毛刺制备的修复体的边缘适应性优于激光制备的修复体。使用Clearfil SE Bond和单组分自酸蚀通用粘接剂All Bond Universal和Prime&Bond active修复的V类牙洞,在使用钻针和激光制备牙洞的情况下,加载前后连续边缘的百分比最高,且在统计学上相似。在使用低收缩粘接剂(Unibond ELS)修复的组别中观察到的连续边缘百分比最低,在加载后分别为 49 和 21:临床意义:与激光修复相比,使用钻针修复的 V 类龋洞边缘更光滑,连续边缘的比例更高。两步自酸蚀粘接剂 Clearfil SE Bond 和一步自酸蚀通用粘接剂 All Bond Universal 和 Prime&Bond active 的边缘表现相当。
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Dentistry, published by Mosher & Linder, Inc., provides peer-reviewed scientific articles with clinical significance for the general dental practitioner.