北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2015, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (6): 990-993. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671167X.2015.06.018

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

聚乳酸可吸收根管桩与3种粘接剂的粘接强度

潘徽1, 2,程灿1,胡嘉1,刘鹤1△,孙志辉3   

  1. ( 1. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院儿童口腔科, 北京100081; 2. 北京大学第三医院口腔科, 北京100191; 3. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院口腔材料研究室, 北京100081)
  • 出版日期:2015-12-18 发布日期:2015-12-18
  • 通讯作者: 刘鹤 E-mail:heliu69@126.com

Bond strengths of absorbable polylactic acid root canal post with three different adhesives

PAN Hui1, 2,CHENG Can1,HU Jia1,LIU He1△,SUN Zhihui3,   

  1. (1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China; 2. Department of Stomatology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China; 3. Dental Materials Research Laboratory, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China)
  • Online:2015-12-18 Published:2015-12-18
  • Contact: LIU He E-mail:heliu69@126.com

摘要:

目的:研究聚乳酸可吸收根管桩与3种粘接剂的粘接强度,寻找可用于聚乳酸可吸收根管桩的合适的可吸收粘接剂,为进一步的应用奠定基础。方法:使用聚乳酸根管桩修复离体牙,用不同的粘接剂进行聚乳酸根管桩的粘接。按使用的粘接剂分为3组:氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂组、纤维蛋白粘接剂组和玻璃离子水门汀组。将离体牙制成薄片试样并进行微推出试验,测试不同粘接剂的粘接强度,对结果进行方差分析。将经过测试的薄片试样,放置于显微镜下观察粘接破坏的方式,分为4种:桩-粘接剂界面破坏、牙本质-粘接剂界面破坏、粘接剂的破坏和可吸收桩的破坏。结果:测得氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂的粘接强度为(16.83±6.97)MPa,玻璃离子水门汀的粘接强度为(12.10±5.09)MPa,这两组的粘接强度均高于纤维蛋白粘接剂的粘接强度(1.17±0.50)MPa,P<0.001,差异有统计学意义,而氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂的粘接强度与玻璃离子水门汀的粘接强度的差异没有统计学意义,P值为0.156。观察粘接破坏的方式,在氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂组,桩-粘接剂界面破坏占25.0%,牙本质-粘接剂界面破坏占16.7%,粘接剂的破坏占33.3%,可吸收桩的破坏占25.0%;在纤维蛋白粘接剂组,桩-粘接剂界面破坏占66.7%,牙本质-粘接剂界面破坏占22.2%,粘接剂的破坏占11.1%;在玻璃离子水门汀组,桩-粘接剂界面破坏占87.5%,粘接剂的破坏占12.5%。纤维蛋白粘接剂和玻璃离子水门汀粘接剂,以桩-粘接剂界面破坏为主,而在氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂组,各种破坏方式的出现次数较为平均。结论:从粘接强度方面,纤维蛋白粘接剂的粘接强度低,难以满足临床使用的需求,氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂和玻璃离子水门汀的粘接强度可以满足临床需求;氰基丙烯酸酯粘接剂是可用于聚乳酸可吸收根管桩的较好的可吸收粘接剂。

关键词:  , 龋齿, 聚乳酸, 管桩, 粘接强度

Abstract:

Objective: To find absorbable adhesives with suitable bonding properties for the absorbable polylactic acid root canal post. To test and compare the bond strengths of absorbable polylactic acid root canal post with three different adhesives.  Methods: The absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts were used to restore the extracted teeth, using 3 different adhesives: cyanoacrylates, fibrin sealant and glass ionomer cement. The teeth were prepared into slices for micro-push-out test. The bond strength was statistically analyzed using ANOVA. The specimens were examined using microscope and the failure mode was divided into four categories: cohesive failure between absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts and adhesives, cohesive failure between dentin and adhesives, failure within the adhesives and failure within the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts. Results:The bond strength of cyanoacrylates [(16.83±6.97) MPa] and glass ionomer cement [(12.10±5.09) MPa] were significantly higher than fibrin sealant [(1.17±0.50) MPa], P<0.001. There was no significant difference between cyanoacrylates and glass ionomer cement (P=0.156). In the group of cyanoacrylates, the cohesive failure between the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts and the adhesives was 25.0%, the cohesive failure between the dentin and the adhesives was 16.7%, the failure within the adhesives was 33.3%, and the failure within the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts was 25.0%. In the group of fibrin sealant, the cohesive failure between the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts and the adhesives was 66.7%, the cohesive failure between the dentin and the adhesives was 22.2%, the failure within the adhesives was 11.1%. In the group of glass ionomer cement, the cohesive failure between the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts and the adhesives was 87.5%, the failure within the adhesives was 12.5%. The major failure mode in fibrin sealant and glass ionomer cement was the cohesive failure between the absorbable polylactic acid root canal posts and the adhesives. No  major failure modes were found in the group of cyanoacrylates. Conclusion: The bond strength of fibrin sealant is low, which cannot meet the requirement of clinical use. The bond strengths of cyanoacrylates and glass ionomer cement are suitable for clinical use. The cyanoacrylates are a kind of absorbable adhesive which has suitable bonding properties for the absorbable polylactic acid root canal post.

Key words: Dental caries, Polylactic acid, Root canal post, Bond strength

中图分类号: 

  • R788.1
[1] 陈心心, 唐哲, 乔艳春, 荣文笙. 北京市密云区4岁儿童患龋状况及其与龋活跃性检测的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(5): 833-838.
[2] 赵思铭,赵晓含,张杰,王党校,王晓燕. 虚拟现实技术用于龋坏识别教学[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 139-142.
[3] 陈小贤,钟洁,闫文娟,张红梅,姜霞,黄芊,薛世华,刘星纲. 树脂冠修复乳前牙的临床效果评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(5): 907-912.
[4] 李秋菊,宫玮玉,董艳梅. 生物活性玻璃预处理对牙本质粘接界面耐久性的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(5): 931-937.
[5] 唐仁韬,李欣海,于江利,冯琳,高学军. 复合树脂与玻璃陶瓷微拉伸粘接强度的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(4): 755-761.
[6] 张媛,韩建民,刘林,邓旭亮. 一体化玻璃纤维桩修复漏斗状根管粘接强度的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(2): 327-334.
[7] 李榕,陈科龙,王勇,刘云松,周永胜,孙玉春. 骨组织工程支架3D打印系统的建立与支架宏微结构精度的可控性评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(1): 115-119.
[8] 朱晓鸣,齐璇,李德利,张玉玮,李和平,谭建国. 不同温度新型大气压冷等离子体处理对牙本质粘接强度的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(1): 43-48.
[9] 周琼,彭楚芳,秦满. 近红外光透照技术诊断乳磨牙早期邻面龋[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(1): 59-64.
[10] 李刚,王健生,秦思达,张佳,杜宁,张靖,孙欣,任宏. 布地奈德联合氨溴索氧化驱动雾化吸入预防成人开胸术后肺炎的临床疗效[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(5): 840-844.
[11] 倪莲芳,王鹤,李虹,张志刚,刘新民. 非人类免疫缺陷病毒感染肺隐球菌病34例临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(5): 855-860.
[12] 王芳芳,杨殷杰,侯晓玫. 电火花蚀刻镍钛根管锉HyFlex EDM的表面形态和抗疲劳折断性能[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(5): 876-881.
[13] 王昊,陈亮,叶小云. 雷公藤甲素对TM4细胞氧化应激及PI3K/AKT通路的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4): 607-612.
[14] 王建伟,满立波,黄广林,王海,徐啸,朱晓斐,李玮,刘振华. 经会阴三步法手术策略治疗单纯性男性骨盆骨折后尿道离断[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4): 617-620.
[15] 唐兴国,颜野,邱敏,卢剑,陆敏,侯小飞,黄毅,马潞林. 单中心16年青年膀胱尿路上皮癌患者的诊治[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4): 630-633.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!