华西口腔医学杂志

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同粘接剂对金属烤瓷冠边缘微渗漏影响的研究

姜明欣 黄克强 李志刚 高秀秋 李春山   

  1. 辽宁医学院附属口腔医院口腔内科, 锦州121004
  • 收稿日期:2011-04-25 修回日期:2011-04-25 出版日期:2011-04-20 发布日期:2011-04-20
  • 通讯作者: 黄克强,Tel:0416-2655121
  • 作者简介:姜明欣(1979—),男,黑龙江人,主治医师,硕士
  • 基金资助:

    辽宁省教育厅科学研究计划基金资助项目(2008394)

A comparative study of marginal microleakage using different cements in porcelain-fused-to-metal crown

JIANG Ming-xin, HUANG Ke-qiang, LI Zhi-gang, GAO Xiu-qiu, LI Chun-shan   

  1. Dept. of Oral Medicine, Affiliated Dental Hospital of Liaoning Medical College, Jinzhou 121004, China
  • Received:2011-04-25 Revised:2011-04-25 Online:2011-04-20 Published:2011-04-20
  • Contact: HUANG Ke-qiang,Tel:0416-2655121

摘要:

目的评价4种不同粘接剂在金属烤瓷冠修复中的微渗漏情况。方法制作16个金属烤瓷冠,随机分成4组,分别采用玻璃离子黏固剂、树脂加强玻璃离子黏固剂、PanaviaF粘接剂和Super-Bond C&B粘接剂黏固于前磨牙,经温度循环试验后,将样本浸入2%品红溶液中24 h,用体视显微镜观察牙-黏固剂界面边缘微渗漏状况,并进行分级评估。采用SPSS 13.0软件对4组的微渗漏程度进行统计分析。结果PanaviaF粘接剂微渗漏最小,其次是Super-Bond C&B粘接剂和树脂加强玻璃离子黏固剂,玻璃离子黏固剂微渗漏最大(总体比较掊2=157.60,P<0.01;组间两两比较均为P<0.05)。结论树脂类粘接系统抗边缘微渗漏性能优于玻璃离子类黏固剂,适于黏固金属烤瓷全冠修复,是临床首选粘接材料。

关键词: 边缘微渗漏, 树脂粘接系统, 金属烤瓷冠, 染色法, 温度循环试验

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the marginal microleakage of porcelain-fused-to-metal crown using four different  cements. Methods Sixteen porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were built and randomly divided into 4 group, luted onto standard prepared human forward molars using four different cements(glass ionomer cement, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, PanaviaF, Super-Bond C&B adhesive luting system). After temperature cycling test, all the crowns were then submerged in 2% fuchsin for 24 h. The marginal microleakage at tooth cement interfaces was observed using light stereomicroscopy and evaluated in classification index. The marginal microleakage grade of 4 groups were analyzed by SPSS 13.0. Results The PanaviaF demonstrated the least marginal microleakage, Super-Bond C&B adhesive luting system, resin-modified glass ionomer cement showed an intermediate level of marginal microleakage, glass ionomer cement was associated with severe marginal microleakage(total, 掊2=157.60, P<0.01; among the different groups, P<0.05). Conclusion Adhesive resin luting system which is the first selection in clinical is better than glass ionomer cement and is good at porcelain-fused-to-metal crown.

Key words: marginal microleakage, adhesive resin luting system, porcelain-fused-to-metal crown, staining method, temperature cycling test