北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2017, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (6): 1055-1059. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2017.06.021

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同浓度的碳二亚胺乙醇溶液处理对牙本质自酸蚀粘接剂粘接强度的影响

唐琳,张一,李皓,刘玉华△,周永胜,李博文,吴唯伊,王思雯   

  1. (北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院,修复科口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室口腔数字医学北京市重点实验室,北京100081)
  • 出版日期:2017-12-18 发布日期:2017-12-18
  • 通讯作者: 刘玉华 E-mail: lyhdentist@163.com

Influence of EDC ethanol solution on dentin shear bond strength with a self-etch adhesive system

TANG Lin, ZHANG Yi, LI Hao, LIU Yu-hua△, ZHOU Yong-sheng, LI Bo-wen, WU Wei-yi, WANG Si-wen   

  1. (Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China)
  • Online:2017-12-18 Published:2017-12-18
  • Contact: LIU Yu-hua E-mail: lyhdentist@163.com

摘要: 目的:采用微剪切方法分析不同浓度碳二亚胺[1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide,EDC]乙醇溶液处理牙本质表面对自酸蚀粘接剂粘接强度和断裂模式的影响。方法: 收集离体健康智齿80颗,随机分为5组,每组16颗。低速切割机暴露牙合面中层牙本质后使用两步法自酸蚀粘接剂(Clearfil SE Bond)进行牙本质粘接,所有试件设计为粘接半径1 mm、高3 mm的树脂柱试件。粘接时除空白组按常规步骤完成粘接外, 其余4组在Ⅰ液(底涂剂)处理后,分别采用3种浓度(0.01 mol/L、0.3 mol/L、0.5 mol/L)的EDC乙醇溶液和乙醇溶剂对牙本质表面处理1 min 后涂布Ⅱ液(粘接剂)完成粘接。将所有试件放入含0.5%(质量分数)氯胺T生理盐水浸泡24 h后进行微剪切实验,并在体式显微镜下观察试件断裂模式。结果: 0.01 mol/L、0.3 mol/L、0.5 mol/L EDC处理组、乙醇溶剂处理组的即刻微剪切粘接强度分别为(35.29±8.97) MPa、(40.24±9.68) MPa、(37.38±9.66) MPa、(37.49±7.76) MPa,高于空白组(33.81±7.98) MPa,各组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);断裂模式在各组间差异也无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论: 不同浓度的EDC乙醇溶液处理对牙本质自酸蚀粘接剂的即刻粘接强度、断裂模式没有影响。

关键词: 酸蚀, 牙, 剪切强度, 牙粘接, 1-乙基-(3-二甲基氨基丙基)碳酰二亚胺

Abstract: Objective:To evaluate the bonding ability of one representative self-etch adhesive system by applying the micro-shear bond strength test method with different concentrations of carbodiimide [1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide, EDC] ethanol solution pretreatment. Methods:Extracted sound human third molars were collected from patients ranging 18 to 40 years. In the study, 80 molars were first sectioned to prepare a flat middle coronal dentin surface and then were randomly divided into 5 groups (n=16) according to without/with different surface treatments [blank control; 80% (volume fraction) ethanol control; EDC ethanol solution of three concentrations (0.01 mol/L, 0.3 mol/L and 0.5 mol/L)]. Each specimen underwent a micro-shear bond strength test and failure mode observation. The data collected were subjected to statistical analysis using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s test to analyze the difference of the microshear bond strength, and chi-square test/Fisher’s exact test for the failure mode frequency of the micro-shear bond strength test specimens at a significance level of P=0.05. Results: The micro-shear bond strength of the three concentration EDC treatments were (35.29±8.97) MPa (0.01 mol/L EDC treatment group), (40.24±9.68) MPa (0.3 mol/L EDC treatment group), (37.38±9.66) MPa (0.5 mol/L EDC treatment group) separately; and that of the 80% ethanol group was (37.49±7.76) MPa. All micro-shear bond strength value of the above four groups was statistically higher than that of the blank control group [(33.81±7.98) MPa]. The immediate micro-shear bond strength and failure mode was of no statistically significant difference among all the groups. It was noticed that the immediate micro-shear bond strength of 0.3 mol/L was higher than that of all the other groups, especially higher than that of the 80% ethanol pretreatment group despite that there was no significant difference among all the groups. And the test of failure mode indicated that the cohesive failure was more common, while the frequency of adhesive failure was rare in each experimental group. Conclusion:EDC pretreatment had no adverse effect on the immediate microshear bond strengths of Clearfil SE Bond. Meanwhile, EDC treatment did not cause more adhesive failure in immediate micro-shear test, which had further denoted what was said above. However, it needs more research to illustrate the anti-enzymatic role of EDC in dentin bonding.

Key words: Acid etching, dental, Shear strength, Dental bonding, 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopro-pyl) carbodiimide

中图分类号: 

  • R781.05
[1] 刘嘉昱, 祝宁, 张育祯, 高贤明, 张宇. 动态导航辅助环钻取骨的准确性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(2): 365-371.
[2] 王昕莹, 程雪原, 张孟钧, 李菲, 段晋瑜, 乔静. 浓缩生长因子联合引导性组织再生术治疗下颌磨牙根分叉病变的疗效[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(2): 372-379.
[3] 杨咏涛, 田淯文, 单珅瑶, 李文博, 商相宜, 王艺蓁, 郭殊玮, 高梓翔, 温奥楠, 赵一姣, 王勇. 基于多视图立体视觉的无牙颌种植固定修复软组织数字印模的方法[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 126-132.
[4] 温奥楠, 张晓会, 杨咏涛, 高梓翔, 李文博, 单珅瑶, 商相宜, 田淯文, 郭殊玮, 王艺蓁, 王勇, 赵一姣. 基于非刚性配准构建三维颜面微笑仿真序列数据的方法[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 139-144.
[5] 于录, 吴灵, 刘筱菁, 李自力. 基于数据库相似性检索的正颌外科手术规划技术流程可行性研究: 随机对照试验[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 145-152.
[6] 高若凡, 马天宇, 王润楷, 殷雨辰, 李芮迪, 王丹丹, 夏斌. 细胞膜囊泡递送靶向肿瘤坏死因子-α的小干扰RNA对牙髓干细胞的抗炎作用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 22-29.
[7] 王月, 梁宇红. 繁茂型牙骨质-骨结构不良1例[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 220-224.
[8] 潘莲菲, 李文静, 王瑞洋, 焦剑, 曹战强, 高丽, 释栋. 口服抗生素辅助牙周机械治疗对重度牙周炎的短期疗效及影响因素[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 30-36.
[9] 孙菲, 王翠, 李思琪, 危伊萍, 余日月, 胡文杰. 赤藓糖醇喷砂与超声治疗对种植体周黏膜炎疗效的随机对照临床研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 37-42.
[10] 郑苗, 马欣蓉, 陈昊, 赵恒欣, 张宇, 谭建国, 李和平, 王霄. 大气压放电冷等离子体处理对人牙龈成纤维细胞生物学行为的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 60-67.
[11] 张斯巧, 刘建, 徐涛, 胡文杰, 张浩筠, 危伊萍. 异种骨与人工合成骨在磨牙拔牙同期微翻瓣牙槽嵴保存术中的临床效果比较[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 74-83.
[12] 邵梁, 马雯洁, 陈莹, 丁茜, 张磊. 上颌切牙前伸和正中咬合接触解剖特征的数字化测量与分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2026, 58(1): 99-106.
[13] 欧乾民, 李政诗, 牛露菡, 任倩慧, 刘欣雨, 毛学理, 施松涛. 口腔干细胞的生物学特性与转化研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2025, 57(5): 827-835.
[14] 王宇蓝, 曾浩, 张玉峰. 口腔种植中血浆基质的临床转化现状与前沿探索[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2025, 57(5): 836-840.
[15] 马保金, 李建华, 桑元华, 于洋, 仇吉川, 邵金龙, 李凯, 刘世岳, 杜密, 商玲玲, 葛少华. 基于微环境和干细胞调控的牙周组织再生关键技术的建立与应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2025, 57(5): 841-846.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!