摘要
目的:比较4种光固化充填材料修复体边缘微渗漏。方法:在新鲜拔除的40个人前磨牙的颊侧牙颈部制洞,将牙齿分为4组,每组10个。分别充填4种修复材料Restorative Z-350、Z-100(3M),Cha-risma(Dentsply),Durafill(Kulzer)经冷热交替试验(4～60°C,循环600次),采用10g/L碱性品红染料渗入法,在体视显微镜下观察修复体与牙体洞壁间边缘微渗漏。结果:4种材料中3M-Z350微渗漏最小,Durafill最大,Durafill与其他3组相比有显著性差异(P<0.05);3M-Z100和Chrisma无显著性差异(P>0.05);3M-Z350与其他3组相比有显著性差异(P<0.01)。结论:3M-Z350可能是临床修复牙体缺损的较好材料。
AIM： To evaluate the microleakage in class V restrorations after use of four kinds of composites. METHODS： 40 freshly extracted teeth were randomly assigned to 4 experimental groups, 10 of each. Class V cavities were prepared on labial side of each tooth. Four kinds of composite, Restorative Z -350 （3 M ）, Restorative Z - 100 （3M）, Charisma（ Dentsply）, and Durafill（Kulzer） were used respectively to each group, with ten cavities for every one kind of composite. After thermal cycling（ x600 ,4-60℃） ,the teeth were immersed in 1% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours at room temperature. All teeth were cut labial - lingual direction and the penetration of dye alone the wall of cavities were observed under stereoscopic microscope. RESULTS： Restorative Z -350 is a lesser microleakage material. Significant differences were observed between Restorative Z -350 and other three materials （P 〈0.01 ）. No statistically significant differences in microleakage were noted between group 2 and group 3 specimens （ P 〉 0.05 ）. CONCLUSION： Restorative Z -350 may be the better tooth restrorative material.
出处
《牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志》
CAS
2008年第2期77-79,共3页
Chinese Journal of Conservative Dentistry
关键词
微渗漏
复合树脂
光固化
microleakage
resin composites
light - cured
