Email Alert | RSS

北京大学学报（医学版） ›› 2021, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (1): 46-53. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.01.008

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

3种自酸蚀粘接系统和轻度唾液污染对乳牙釉质及牙本质粘接耐久性的影响

骆池怡,彭楚芳,杨媛,秦满,王媛媛()   

  1. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院,儿童口腔科 国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心 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
  • 收稿日期:2020-09-21 出版日期:2021-02-18 发布日期:2021-02-07
  • 通讯作者: 王媛媛 E-mail:cwyyd@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    中华口腔医学会青年临床科研基金牙科粘接技术研究项目(CSA-B2018-10)

Effects of three self-etch adhesives and mild salivary contamination on the bonding durability of deciduous teeth

LUO Chi-yi,PENG Chu-fang,YANG Yuan,QIN Man,WANG Yuan-yuan()   

  1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2020-09-21 Online:2021-02-18 Published:2021-02-07
  • Contact: Yuan-yuan WANG E-mail:cwyyd@126.com
  • Supported by:
    Chinese Stomatological Association Youth Clinical Research Foundation(CSA-B2018-10)

RICH HTML

 18   

PDF (PC)

175

摘要：

目的: 比较Clearfil SE Bond(SE)、AdperTM Easy One(EO)、Scotchbond Universal(SBU)3种自酸蚀粘接系统对乳牙釉质和牙本质粘接耐久性的影响,以及粘接界面轻度唾液污染后即刻吹干对粘接耐久性的影响。方法: 将240个乳牙釉质及240个牙本质样本随机分为16组(n = 15个/组), 实验组选用SE、EO、SBU等3种不同自酸蚀粘接系统,对照组选用AdperTM Single Bond Plus(SL)全酸蚀粘接系统,在无污染或有唾液污染、蒸馏水储存(水浴储存24 h)或水浴循环老化(5 ℃和55 ℃水浴中循环5 000次)等两种不同储存条件下,测量每组中12个试样的剪切粘接强度,用扫描电子显微镜观察分析剩余3个试样的粘接界面情况。采用三因素方差分析法和Tukey检验对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 对于乳牙牙釉质粘接,全酸蚀粘接剂的即刻剪切粘接强度(28.92±1.83) MPa和老化后剪切粘接强度(27.27±3.03) MPa均显著高于其他组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);EO组有唾液污染时即刻剪切粘接强度(11.88±3.17) MPa或老化后剪切粘接强度(11.90±3.98) MPa均显著低于其无唾液污染时的即刻剪切粘接强度(19.57±3.89) MPa或老化后剪切粘接强度(19.01±5.03) MPa,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。对于乳牙牙本质的粘接,老化处理后全酸蚀粘接剂的剪切粘接强度(14.31±1.97) MPa显著低于其他粘接剂组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);EO组有唾液污染时的即刻剪切粘接强度(12.99±2.66) MPa显著低于其无唾液污染时剪切粘接强度(18.63±3.61) MPa,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);EO组的无/有污染状态下的剪切粘接强度[(14.41±2.68) MPa和(10.93±2.18) MPa]均显著低于SE组[(21.10±4.40) MPa和(19.56±3.64) MPa]和SBU组[(22.27±5.43) MPa和(20.60±5.11) MPa], 差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论: 全酸蚀粘接剂对乳牙釉质粘接耐久性更佳;SE和SBU对乳牙牙本质有更好的粘接耐久性;粘接界面轻度唾液污染后即刻吹干处理可恢复SE和SBU的粘接强度,但对EO的粘接性能影响较大,无法恢复其粘接耐久性。

关键词: 乳牙, 牙釉质, 牙本质, 自酸蚀, 唾液污染

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the bonding durability of three different self-etch adhesives to primary enamel and dentin, and to investigate the effect of mild salivary contamination followed by air drying on the bonding durability.Methods: Two hundred and forty enamel specimens were divided randomly into 16 groups (n=15/group)according to the adhesive system [self-etch adhesives: Clearfil SE Bond(SE), AdperTM Easy One (EO), Scotchbond Universal (SBU); total-etch adhesive: AdperTM Single Bond Plus(SL)], contamination status (non-contaminated vs. salivary-contaminated ) and storage condition (stored in distilled water for 24 h vs. aging mode 5 000 thermal cycles in 5 ℃ and 55 ℃). Two hundred and forty dentin specimens were assigned in the same way. Shear bond strength for 12 specimens in each group were measured. The adhesive interface for the residual specimens in each group was observed by scanning electron microscopy(SEM). Data were analyzed by three-way analysis of variance and Tukey test(P<0.05).Results: For primary enamel, total-etch adhesive showed higher initial shear bond strength values (28.92±1.83) MPa and shear bond strength values (27.27±3.03) MPa after thermal cycles compared with the other groups, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P<0.01). Shear bond strength values of EO decreased significantly in salivary-treated groups, regardless of storage conditions, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.01). For primary dentin, shear bond strength values of EO decreased significantly in salivary-treated groups after 24 h (P<0.01). After 5 000 thermal cycles, total-etch adhesive showed significantly lower shear bond strength values (14.31±1.97) MPa compared with the other groups, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P<0.01), and shear bond strength values of EO were significantly lower than those in SE and SBU groups (P<0.01), regardless of contamination status.Conclusion: Total-etch adhesive SL has better bonding durability to primary enamel. SE and SBU have better bonding durability to primary dentin and have a certain resistance to salivary contamination, while the bonding performance of EO is compromised greatly by mild salivary contamination followed by air drying.

Key words: Primary teeth, Enamel, Dentin, Self-etch, Salivary contamination

中图分类号: 

  • R788.4

图1

粘接试样建立实验步骤"

表1

乳牙釉质剪切强度结果的三因素方差分析"

Factors Sum of squares df Mean square F-ratio P value
Adhesive 3 358.52 3 1 119.51 72.88 <0.001
Contamination 792.74 1 792.74 51.61 <0.001
Storage 0.06 1 0.06 0.00 0.952
Adhesive×contamination 180.41 3 60.14 3.92 0.010
Adhesive×storage 65.28 3 21.76 1.42 0.240
Contamination×storage 3.59 1 3.59 0.23 0.630
Adhesive×contamination×storage 6.11 3 2.04 0.13 0.941

图2

乳牙釉质试样的断裂模式"

图3

唾液污染组釉质粘接界面的扫描电镜图像"

表2

乳牙牙本质剪切强度结果的三因素方差分析"

Factors Sum of squares df Mean square F-ratio P value
Adhesive 1 392.80 3 464.27 32.56 <0.001
Contamination 295.43 1 295.43 20.72 <0.001
Storage 22.86 1 22.86 1.60 0.207
Adhesive×contamination 74.57 3 24.86 1.74 0.160
Adhesive×storage 341.00 3 113.67 7.97 <0.001
Contamination×storage 9.11 1 9.11 0.64 0.425
Adhesive×contamination×storage 13.17 3 4.39 0.31 0.820

图4

乳牙牙本质试样的断裂模式"

图5

唾液污染组牙本质粘接界面的扫描电镜图像"

[1] Perdigao J, Sezinando A, Monteiro PC. Laboratory bonding ability of a multi-purpose dentin adhesive[J]. Am J Dent, 2012,25(3):153-158.
[2] Munoz MA, Luque-Martinez IV, Malaquias P, et al. In vitro longe-vity of bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentin[J]. Oper Dent, 2015,40(3):282-292.
doi: 10.2341/14-055-L pmid: 25405904
[3] Lawson NC, Robles A, Fu CC, et al. Two-year clinical trial of a universal adhesive in total-etch and self-etch mode in non-carious cervical lesions[J]. J Dent, 2015,43(10):1229-1234.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.009 pmid: 26231300
[4] Vermelho PM, Reis AF, Ambrosano GMB, et al. Adhesion of multimode adhesives to enamel and dentin after one year of water storage[J]. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2016,21(5):1707-1715.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1966-1 pmid: 27714528
[5] Santschi K, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A, et al. Effect of salivary contamination and decontamination on bond strength of two one-step selfetching adhesives to dentin of primary and permanent teeth[J]. J Adhes Dent, 2015,17(1):51-57.
doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a33514 pmid: 25625136
[6] Soares FZM, Rocha RdO, Raggio DP, et al. Microtensile bond strength of different adhesive systems to primary and permanent dentin[J]. Pediatr Dent, 2005,27(6):457-462.
pmid: 16532885
[7] Ozmen B, Koyuturk AE, Tokay U, et al. Evaluation of bond strength of self-etching adhesives having different pH on primary and permanent teeth dentin[J]. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater, 2015,13(3):e274-e279.
doi: 10.5301/jabfm.5000234 pmid: 26391869
[8] Osorio R, Yamauti M, Ruiz-Requena ME, et al. MMPs activity and bond strength in deciduous dentine-resin bonded interfaces[J]. J Dent, 2013,41(6):549-555.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.02.008 pmid: 23454331
[9] Soares FZ, Lenzi TL, de Oliveira Rocha R. Degradation of resin-dentine bond of different adhesive systems to primary and permanent dentine[J]. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent, 2017,18(2):113-118.
doi: 10.1007/s40368-017-0282-z pmid: 28271448
[10] Yaguchi T. Layering mechanism of MDP-Ca salt produced in demineralization of enamel and dentin apatite[J]. Dent Mater, 2017,33(1):23-32.
doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.09.037 pmid: 27773341
[11] Kulkarni AS, Kokate S, hegde V, et al. The effect of saliva con-tamination on shear bond strength of two universal bonding agents: an in vitro study[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2018,12(4):6-10.
[12] Cobanoglu N, Unlu N, Ozer F, et al. Bond strength of self-etch adhesives after saliva contamination at different application steps[J]. Oper Dent, 2013,38(5):505-511.
doi: 10.2341/12-260-L
[13] Loguercio AD, Munoz MA, Luque-Martinez I, et al. Does active application of universal adhesives to enamel in self-etch mode improve their performance?[J]. J Dent, 2015,43(9):1060-1070.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.04.005 pmid: 25908573
[14] Cardenas AFM, Siqueira FSF, Bandeca MC, et al. Impact of pH and application time of meta-phosphoric acid on resin-enamel and resin-dentin bonding[J]. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2018,78:352-361.
doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.11.028 pmid: 29202298
[15] Gong HH, Guo XW, Cao DF, et al. Photopolymerizable and moisture-curable polyurethanes for dental adhesive applications to increase restoration durability[J]. J Mater Chem B, 2019,7(5):744-754.
doi: 10.1039/c8tb01716f pmid: 32254848
[16] Antoniazzi BF, Nicoloso GF, Lenzi TL, et al. Selective acid etching improves the bond strength of universal adhesive to sound and demineralized enamel of primary teeth[J]. J Adhes Dent, 2016,18(4):311-316.
doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a36154 pmid: 27419240
[17] Memarpour M, Shafiei F, Razmjouei F, et al. Shear bond strength and scanning electron microscopy characteristics of universal adhesive in primary tooth dentin: An in vitro study.[J]. Dent Res J (Isfahan), 2018,15(4):264-270.
[18] Porto IM, Saiani RA, Chan KL, et al. Organic and inorganic content of fluorotic rat incisors measured by FTIR spectros-copy[J]. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc, 2010,77(1):59-63.
doi: 10.1016/j.saa.2010.04.024 pmid: 20547096
[19] Silverstone LM, Saxton CA, Dogon IL, et al. Variation in the pattern of acid etching of human dental enamel examined by scanning electron microscopy[J]. Caries Res, 1975,9(5):373-387.
doi: 10.1159/000260179 pmid: 1055640
[20] Sumikawa DA, Marshall GW, Gee L, et al. Microstructure of primary tooth dentin[J]. Pediatr Dent, 1999,21(7):439-444.
pmid: 10633518
[21] Lenzi TL, Guglielmi Cde A, Arana-Chavez VE, et al. Tubule density and diameter in coronal dentin from primary and permanent human teeth[J]. Microsc Microanal, 2013,19(6):1445-1449.
doi: 10.1017/S1431927613012725
[22] Ye Q, Wang Y, Spencer P. Nanophase separation of polymers exposed to simulated bonding conditions[J]. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater, 2009,88(2):339-348.
[23] Werle SB, Steglich A, Soares FZM, et al. Effect of prolonged air drying on the bond strength of adhesive systems to dentin.[J]. Gen Dent, 2015,63(6):68-72.
pmid: 26545278
[24] Landuyt KLV, Snauwaert J, Munck JD, et al. Origin of interfacial droplets with one-step adhesives[J]. J Dent Res, 2007,86(8):739-744.
doi: 10.1177/154405910708600810 pmid: 17652202
[25] Pragasam AX, Duraisamy V, Nayak UA, et al. Evaluation of sealing ability two self-etching adhesive systems and a glass ionomer lining LC under composite restoration in primary tooth: An in vitro study[J]. J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2015,7(Suppl 2):518-523.
doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.163525
[26] Angker L, Nockolds C, Swain MV, et al. Quantitative analysis of the mineral content of sound and carious primary dentine using BSE imaging[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2004,49(2):99-107.
doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2003.08.006
[27] van Meerbeek B, de Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges[J]. Oper Dent, 2003,28(3):215-235.
pmid: 12760693
[1] 马欣蓉,朱晓鸣,李静,李德利,李和平,谭建国. 新型大气压冷等离子体射流处理对牙本质胶原纤维交联化的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 83-88.
[2] 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.
[3] 谢静,赵玉鸣,饶南荃,汪晓彤,方滕姣子,李晓霞,翟越,李静芝,葛立宏,王媛媛. 3种口腔颌面部来源的间充质干细胞成血管内皮分化潜能的比较研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(5): 900-906.
[4] 潘怡湘,李秀花,田福聪,王晓燕. 髓腔内压对树脂水门汀与牙本质粘接强度的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(2): 321-326.
[5] 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.
[6] 游文喆,窦桂丽,夏斌. 乳牙间接牙髓治疗两年疗效观察及影响因素分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(1): 65-69.
[7] 李芳,刘洋,刘浩辰,冯海兰. 乳光牙本质患者的基因变异分析及患牙的组织学观察[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4): 666-671.
[8] 汪晓彤，饶南荃，方腾姣子，赵玉鸣，葛立宏. 乳牙牙髓干细胞CD146阳性/阴性细胞亚群生物学特性的比较[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(2): 284-292.
[9] 臧海玲，王月，梁宇红. 有机溶剂对牙本质表面残留根管封闭剂的清除效果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(1): 63-68.
[10] 贾维茜，赵玉鸣，葛立宏. 人重组转化生长因子β1促进牙髓干细胞的增殖和矿化[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(4): 680-681.
[11] 李皓，刘玉华，罗志强. 生物活性玻璃用于缓解活髓牙全冠预备后敏感的效果评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(4): 709-713.
[12] 信义，王赛楠，崔彩云，董艳梅. 生物活性玻璃和牙本质浸提蛋白对人牙髓细胞的作用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(2): 331-336.
[13] 郭惠杰，高承志， 林斐，刘伟，岳林. 唾液污染对复合树脂间粘接强度的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 96-100.
[14] 傅昭然，田福聪，张路，韩冰，王晓燕. 通用型粘接剂对双固化树脂水门汀牙本质粘接强度的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 101-104.
[15] 王月，梁宇红. 次氯酸钠溶液表面处理对牙本质粘接强度的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 105-109.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张三. 中文标题测试[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2010, 42(1): 1 -10 .
[2] 赵磊, 王天龙 . 右心室舒张末期容量监测用于肝移植术中容量管理的临床研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(2): 188 -191 .
[3] 万有, , 韩济生, John E. Pintar. 孤啡肽基因敲除小鼠电针镇痛作用增强[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(3): 376 -379 .
[4] 张燕, 韩志慧, 钟延丰, 王盛兰, 李玲玲, 郑丹枫. 骨骼肌活组织检查病理诊断技术的改进及应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(4): 459 -462 .
[5] 丰雷, 程嘉, 王玉凤. 注意缺陷多动障碍儿童的运动协调功能[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(3): 333 -336 .
[6] . 书讯[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(3): 225 -328 .
[7] 牟向东, 王广发, 刁小莉, 阙呈立. 肺黏膜相关淋巴组织型边缘区B细胞淋巴瘤一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 346 -350 .
[8] 韩金涛, 赵军, 栾景源, 张龙. 多发结核性腹主动脉瘤一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 361 -364 .
[9] 燕太强, 杨荣利, 郭卫, 沈丹华. 胫骨平滑肌肉瘤伴全身多发骨转移一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 369 -373 .
[10] 常杏芝, 卢红梅, 张月华, 秦炯. 以高血压与红斑肢痛为主要表现的汞中毒一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 377 -380 .
ISSN 1671-167X
CN 11-4691/R
主管单位：中华人民共和国教育部
主办单位：北京大学
地址： 北京市海淀区学院路38号 北京大学医学部 《北京大学学报（医学版）》
邮编：100191
电话：010-82801551
Email： xbbjb2@bjmu.edu.cn

《北京大学学报（医学版）》
微信公众号
版权所有 © 2018 《北京大学学报（医学版）》编辑部