不同表面处理方法对纳米复合陶瓷与树脂水门汀粘接强度的影响

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2020.02.008

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的评估不同表面处理对纳米复合陶瓷与树脂水门汀剪切粘接强度的影响。方法将纳米复合陶瓷用计算机辅助设计/计算机辅助制作（CAD/CAM）技术切割成大小为10 mm×10 mm×3 mm的试件150块,并根据表面处理方法不同将试件按随机数字表的方法随机分为5组（n=30）：对照组、喷砂组、喷砂+硅烷组、酸蚀组和酸蚀+硅烷组。各组试件经过相应表面处理后,使用Single Bond Universal通用粘接剂+RelyX ^TM Ultimate Cliker ^TM树脂水门汀将树脂试件粘接于纳米复合陶瓷试件上,37 ℃蒸馏水中水浴24 h和30 d,万能试验机进行剪切粘接强度测试。结果不同表面处理方法、不同的水浴时间都会影响到剪切粘接强度。喷砂+硅烷组的剪切粘接强度最大,与其他各组间差异均具有统计学意义（P<0.05）;对照组和酸蚀组间差异无统计学意义,但两组与其他组间差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）;喷砂组和酸蚀+硅烷组之间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,但两组与其他组间差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论喷砂、喷砂+硅烷、酸蚀+硅烷对纳米复合陶瓷表面处理,均可提高其与树脂水门汀的剪切粘接强度,喷砂+硅烷处理后剪切粘接强度最佳。

关键词: 纳米复合陶瓷, 剪切粘接强度, 混合物陶瓷, 表面处理

Abstract:

Objective This work aimed to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength of resin nano ceramic to resin cement, thereby providing a theoretical basis for the improvement of clinical application. Methods A total of 150 specimens (10 mm×10 mm×3 mm) were milled from resin nano ceramic blocks (Lava Ultimate) using computer-aided design/computer aided manufacturing(CAD/CAM) technology. The specimens were randomly divided into five groups according to the surface treatment performed, as follows: control, sandblasted, sandblasted+silane, hydrofluoric acid, and hydrofluoric acid+silane groups. After the corresponding surface treatment, the specimens were cemented using Single Bond Universal Adhesive and RelyX ^TM Ultimate Clicker ^TM adhesive resin cement. All cemented specimens were placed in distilled water for 24 h and 30 days and subjected to a shear bond strength test in a universal testing machine. Results The surface treatment and water storage periods showed significant effects on bond strength. Surface treatment with sandblasted+silane showed the highest shear strength values among all tested groups, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). A difference was observed between the control and hydrofluoric acid groups, and both had significantly difference compared with other groups (P<0.05). Sandblasted and hydrofluoric acid+silane groups were not statistically different, and both had significantly difference compared with other groups (P<0.05). Conclusion The surface of resin nanoceramic treated by sandblasted, sandblasted+silane, and hydrofluoric acid+silane can improve the bond strength. The sandblasted+silane group had the best the shear bond strength among the groups.

Key words: resin nano ceramic, shear bond strength, hybrids, surface treatment

中图分类号:

R783.2

张海兵, 霍欢, 刘利军. 不同表面处理方法对纳米复合陶瓷与树脂水门汀粘接强度的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2020, 38(2): 155-159.

Zhang Haibing, Huo Huan, Liu Lijun. Influence of different surface treatments on resin nano ceramic-resin cement bond strength[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2020, 38(2): 155-159.

图/表 5

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

参考文献 22

[1]	Argyrou R, Thompson GA, Cho SH , et al. Edge chipping resistance and flexural strength of polymer infiltrated ceramic network and resin nanoceramic restorative materials[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2016,116(3):397-403.
[2]	Elsaka SE . Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems[J]. Dent Mater J, 2015,34(2):161-167.
[3]	Poggio C, Pigozzo M, Ceci M , et al. Influence of different luting protocols on shear bond strength of computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing resin nanoceramic material to dentin[J]. Dent Res J, 2016,13(2):91-97.
[4]	Kern M, Lehmann F . Influence of surface conditioning on bonding to polyetheretherketon (PEEK)[J]. Dent Mater, 2012,28(12):1280-1283.
[5]	Elsaka SE . Bond strength of novel CAD/CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments[J]. J Adhes Dent, 2014,16(6):531-540.
[6]	Dauti R, Cvikl B, Franz A , et al. Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava ^TM C.O.S and conventional impression technique [J]. BMC Oral Health, 2016,16(1):129.
[7]	Mörmann WH, Stawarczyk B, Ender A , et al. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness[J]. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2013,20:113-125.
[8]	Koller M, Arnetzl G, Holly L , et al. Lava ultimate resin nano ceramic for CAD/CAM: customization case study[J]. Int J Comput Dent, 2012,15(2):159-164.
[9]	Posritong S, Borges AL, Chu TM , et al. The impact of hydrofluoric and etching followed by unfilled resin on the biaxial strength of a glass-ceramic[J]. Dent Mater, 2013,29(11):e281-e290.
[10]	Dias de Souza GM, Thompson VP, Braga RR . Effect of matal primers on microtensile bond strength between zirconia and resin cements[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2011,105(5):296-303.
[11]	Gomes AL, Castillo-Oyagüe R, Lynch CD , et al. Influence of sandblasting granulometry and resin cement composition on microtensile bond strength to zirconia ceramic for dental prosthetic frameworks[J]. J Dent, 2013,41(4):31-41.
[12]	Braga RR, Meira JB, Boaro LC , et al. Adhesion to tooth structure: a critical review of “macro” test methods[J]. Dent Mater, 2010,26(2):e38-e49.
[13]	Cardoso PE, Braga RR, Carrilho MR . Evaluation of micro-tensile, shear and tensile tests determining the bond strength of three adhesive systems[J]. Dent Mater, 1998,14(6):394-398.
[14]	Sau CW, Oh GS, Koh H , et al. Shear bond strength of repaired composite resins using a hybrid composite resin[J]. Oper Dent, 1999,24(3):156-161.
[15]	高晓利, 马淑媛, 刘湘宁 , 等. 4种粘接剂对牙本质剪切强度的比较研究[J]. 中华老年口腔医学杂志, 2018,16(1):38-40.
	Gao XL, Ma SY, Liu XN , et al. Comparison of shear bond strength of four adhesives in dentin[J]. Chin J Geriat Dent, 2018,16(1):38-40.
[16]	Zhang L, Wang DY, Fan J , et al. Stability of bonds made to superficial vs. deep dentin, before and after thermocycling[J]. Dent Mater, 2014,30(11):1245-1251.
[17]	Keul C, Martin A, Wimmer T , et al. Tensil bond strength of PMMA- and composite-based CAD/CAM materials to luting cements after different conditioning methods[J]. Int J Adhes Adhes, 2013,46:122-127.
[18]	Elsaka SE . Effect of surface pretreatments on the bonding strength and durability of self-adhesive resin cements to machined titanium[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2013,109(2):113-120.
[19]	Amaral R, Ozcan M, Bottino MA , et al. Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to glass infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic: the effect of surface conditioning[J]. Dent Mater, 2006,22(3):283-290.
[20]	Yen TY, Blackman RB, Baez RJ . Effect of acid etching on the flexural strength of a feldspathic porcelain and a castable glass ceramic[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1993,70(3):224-233.
[21]	Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y , et al. Porcelain veneers bonded to tooth structure: an ultra-morphological FE-SEM examination of the adhesive interface[J]. Dent Mater, 1999,15(2):105-119.
[22]	Nagai T, Kawamoto Y, Kakehashi Y , et al. Adhesive bonding of a lithium disilicate ceramic material with resin-based luting agents[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2005,2(8):598-605.

组别	最大值	最小值	均数	标准差	上四分位数	下四分位数	中位数
对照组	13.03	7.10	10.04	1.53	10.90	9.12	10.17
喷砂组	14.97	9.37	12.22	1.67	13.19	10.86	12.82
喷砂+硅烷组	19.21	10.47	15.21	2.32	16.16	14.14	15.92
酸蚀组	13.21	7.38	10.70	1.62	11.56	9.91	11.02
酸蚀+硅烷组	16.07	9.53	12.34	1.61	12.91	11.34	12.61

组别	最大值	最小值	均数	标准差	上四分位数	下四分位数	中位数
对照组	10.66	6.18	7.97	1.49	9.33	6.86	7.38
喷砂组	12.94	7.98	10.40	1.78	12.05	8.84	10.16
喷砂+硅烷组	16.47	7.27	12.68	1.97	13.40	11.60	12.66
酸蚀组	11.21	6.21	8.91	1.43	9.76	7.95	8.93
酸蚀+硅烷组	12.35	8.49	10.46	1.11	11.17	9.69	10.68