微拉伸键合强度,键合界面形态,胶粘剂树脂渗透性和填充复合材料的边际适应性Using不同胶粘剂。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.b2000221
Maicon Sebold, Rodrigo Barros Esteves Lins, Beatriz Ometto Sahadi, Marina Rodrigues Santi, Luís Roberto Marcondes Martins, Marcelo Giannini
{"title":"微拉伸键合强度,键合界面形态,胶粘剂树脂渗透性和填充复合材料的边际适应性Using不同胶粘剂。","authors":"Maicon Sebold,&nbsp;Rodrigo Barros Esteves Lins,&nbsp;Beatriz Ometto Sahadi,&nbsp;Marina Rodrigues Santi,&nbsp;Luís Roberto Marcondes Martins,&nbsp;Marcelo Giannini","doi":"10.3290/j.jad.b2000221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated dentin bond strength, failure mode, interface morphology, adhesive infiltration into dentin, and marginal adaptation of bulk-fill composites used with different adhesives.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Third molars received occlusal class I cavities (4 mm x 4 mm x 4 mm) that were bulk-filled with Admira Fusion x-tra (Voco) or SonicFill 2 (Kerr) using four adhesives (Scotchbond Multipurpose, 3M Oral Care; Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Noritake; OptiBond All-In-One, Kerr; Futurabond U, Voco). Scotchbond was used with acid-etching, while the remaining adhesives were applied in self-etch mode. Sixty-four teeth were selected for the microtensile bond strength test (n = 8). Failure modes were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Interface morphology and adhesive infiltration (n = 3) were investigated using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Marginal adaptation (n = 3) was also evaluated using SEM. Bond strength, failure mode, and adhesive infiltration data were analyzed for distribution and homocedasticity, followed by appropriate statistical analyses (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regarding bond strength, no differences were found among adhesives for SonicFill; Clearfil showed a significantly lower mean value than did Scotchbond (p ≤ 0.05) for Admira; the two composites did not differ. Adhesive and mixed failures were observed for all groups. Scotchbond led to thicker hybrid layers with deeper adhesive infiltration as opposed to Futurabond. The groups Admira+Futurabond, SonicFill+Clearfil, and SonicFill+Futurabond presented the highest marginal discontinuity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The tested bulk-fill composites did not affect dentin bonding. Scotchbond and Clearfil seem to be reliable for bonding SonicFill 2 to dentin. The performance of Futurabond was questionable, given its poor-quality interface and higher percentages of marginal gaps.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":"23 5","pages":"409-420"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microtensile Bond Strength, Bonding Interface Morphology, Adhesive Resin Infiltration, and Marginal Adaptation of Bulk-fill Composites Placed Using Different Adhesives.\",\"authors\":\"Maicon Sebold,&nbsp;Rodrigo Barros Esteves Lins,&nbsp;Beatriz Ometto Sahadi,&nbsp;Marina Rodrigues Santi,&nbsp;Luís Roberto Marcondes Martins,&nbsp;Marcelo Giannini\",\"doi\":\"10.3290/j.jad.b2000221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated dentin bond strength, failure mode, interface morphology, adhesive infiltration into dentin, and marginal adaptation of bulk-fill composites used with different adhesives.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Third molars received occlusal class I cavities (4 mm x 4 mm x 4 mm) that were bulk-filled with Admira Fusion x-tra (Voco) or SonicFill 2 (Kerr) using four adhesives (Scotchbond Multipurpose, 3M Oral Care; Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Noritake; OptiBond All-In-One, Kerr; Futurabond U, Voco). Scotchbond was used with acid-etching, while the remaining adhesives were applied in self-etch mode. Sixty-four teeth were selected for the microtensile bond strength test (n = 8). Failure modes were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Interface morphology and adhesive infiltration (n = 3) were investigated using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Marginal adaptation (n = 3) was also evaluated using SEM. Bond strength, failure mode, and adhesive infiltration data were analyzed for distribution and homocedasticity, followed by appropriate statistical analyses (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regarding bond strength, no differences were found among adhesives for SonicFill; Clearfil showed a significantly lower mean value than did Scotchbond (p ≤ 0.05) for Admira; the two composites did not differ. Adhesive and mixed failures were observed for all groups. Scotchbond led to thicker hybrid layers with deeper adhesive infiltration as opposed to Futurabond. The groups Admira+Futurabond, SonicFill+Clearfil, and SonicFill+Futurabond presented the highest marginal discontinuity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The tested bulk-fill composites did not affect dentin bonding. Scotchbond and Clearfil seem to be reliable for bonding SonicFill 2 to dentin. The performance of Futurabond was questionable, given its poor-quality interface and higher percentages of marginal gaps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":\"23 5\",\"pages\":\"409-420\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.b2000221\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.b2000221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:研究不同粘接剂对填充型复合材料的粘结强度、破坏模式、界面形态、粘接剂对牙本质的渗透及边际适应性。材料和方法:第三磨牙接受I类牙合腔(4mm x 4mm x 4mm),用Admira Fusion x-tra (Voco)或SonicFill 2 (Kerr)填充,使用四种粘合剂(Scotchbond Multipurpose, 3M Oral Care;Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Noritake;OptiBond All-In-One, Kerr;未来之路,未来之路。Scotchbond采用酸蚀方式,其余胶粘剂采用自蚀方式。选择64颗牙进行微拉伸粘结强度试验(n = 8),用扫描电镜(SEM)分析失效模式。用共聚焦激光扫描显微镜(CLSM)观察界面形貌和黏合剂的浸润情况(n = 3)。边际适应(n = 3)也使用扫描电镜进行评估。分析黏结强度、破坏模式和黏着物浸润数据的分布和均方差,并进行相应的统计分析(α = 0.05)。结果:不同粘结剂在粘结强度方面无差异;Clearfil的平均值显著低于Scotchbond (p≤0.05);这两种复合物没有差别。所有组均观察到粘接失败和混合失败。与Futurabond相反,Scotchbond导致更厚的杂化层和更深的粘合剂渗透。Admira+Futurabond、SonicFill+Clearfil和SonicFill+Futurabond组的边缘不连续程度最高。结论:块状填充复合材料对牙本质粘结无明显影响。Scotchbond和Clearfil似乎是可靠的粘合SonicFill 2牙本质。The Futurabond的性能was值得怀疑,因为它的界面质量差,边际差距的百分比更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Microtensile Bond Strength, Bonding Interface Morphology, Adhesive Resin Infiltration, and Marginal Adaptation of Bulk-fill Composites Placed Using Different Adhesives.

Purpose: This study evaluated dentin bond strength, failure mode, interface morphology, adhesive infiltration into dentin, and marginal adaptation of bulk-fill composites used with different adhesives.

Materials and methods: Third molars received occlusal class I cavities (4 mm x 4 mm x 4 mm) that were bulk-filled with Admira Fusion x-tra (Voco) or SonicFill 2 (Kerr) using four adhesives (Scotchbond Multipurpose, 3M Oral Care; Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Noritake; OptiBond All-In-One, Kerr; Futurabond U, Voco). Scotchbond was used with acid-etching, while the remaining adhesives were applied in self-etch mode. Sixty-four teeth were selected for the microtensile bond strength test (n = 8). Failure modes were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Interface morphology and adhesive infiltration (n = 3) were investigated using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Marginal adaptation (n = 3) was also evaluated using SEM. Bond strength, failure mode, and adhesive infiltration data were analyzed for distribution and homocedasticity, followed by appropriate statistical analyses (α = 0.05).

Results: Regarding bond strength, no differences were found among adhesives for SonicFill; Clearfil showed a significantly lower mean value than did Scotchbond (p ≤ 0.05) for Admira; the two composites did not differ. Adhesive and mixed failures were observed for all groups. Scotchbond led to thicker hybrid layers with deeper adhesive infiltration as opposed to Futurabond. The groups Admira+Futurabond, SonicFill+Clearfil, and SonicFill+Futurabond presented the highest marginal discontinuity.

Conclusion: The tested bulk-fill composites did not affect dentin bonding. Scotchbond and Clearfil seem to be reliable for bonding SonicFill 2 to dentin. The performance of Futurabond was questionable, given its poor-quality interface and higher percentages of marginal gaps.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1