摘要
目的:比较两种玻璃离子水门汀体外充填后的边缘微渗漏现象,为GCFuji-Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀材料在临床的使用提供一定的参考和资料。方法:选择健康离体前磨牙80颗,随机分为2组,即实验组和对照组,分别进行微渗漏实验和密合度实验。每个样本的颊面近龈1/3处制备3mm×3mm×2mm的V类洞,实验组充填GCFuji-Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀,对照组充填上海青浦尼康齿科器械厂生产玻璃离子水门汀,采用染料渗透实验,用光学显微镜观测染料渗入牙齿的程度及扫描电子显微镜观测充填体边缘的密合状况。结果:染料渗透实验表明两组充填物边缘均有不同程度染料渗入,但GCFuji-Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀少于对照组玻璃离子水门汀;扫描电镜观测显示两组充填物与牙体的间隙宽度平均值分别为:GCFuji-Ⅱ型玻璃离子(13.48±1.089)μm,对照组玻璃离子水门汀(39.54±5.82)μm,两组相比有统计学差异(P<0.01)。结论:GCFuji-Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀边缘封闭性优于对照组玻璃离子水门汀。
Objective： To compare the edge leakages in vitro between two different types of glass ionomer cement and provide a basis for a wide-spread use of Glass Ionomer Cement Fuji- Ⅱ. Methods： Eighty healthy isolated premalors were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group for microleakage and closeness experiments. V-shaped holes of 3 mm× 3 mm× 2 mm were prepared at 1/3 part to gingiva of each premalor. Each hole was filled with Glass Ionomer Cement Fuji- Ⅱ for experimental group or with the other type of glass ionomer cement for control group. The depth of dye penetrating into the teeth was observed through an optical microscope and the slot width of the filling margin was observed through scanning electronic microscope. Results： The filling margins of the two groups had different dye penetration degree, of which experimental group was slighter than the degree of control group. The average slot width between the filling and tooth was （13.48±1. 089）μm in Glass Ionomer Cement Fuji-Ⅱ group versus （39.54±5.82） μm in control group （P〈0.01）. Conclusion. Comparing with the traditional glass ionomer cement, Glass Ionomer Cement Fuji- Ⅱ has a better closed edge in filling.
出处
《武汉大学学报（医学版）》
CAS
2007年第6期756-758,785,共4页
Medical Journal of Wuhan University
