摘要
目的:评价不同粘接剂粘固金属烤瓷冠的边缘微渗漏情况,为临床选择粘接剂提供实验依据。方法:选取传统的玻璃离子粘接剂、树脂加强型玻璃离子粘接剂、Panavia F粘接剂和Super-Bond C&B粘接剂4种材料,应用于离体牙金属烤瓷冠的粘接,用扫描电镜测量粘接剂与牙组织面间微缝隙的缝隙宽度。数据处理用SPSS 11.5软件包,其中组间比较采用方差分析。结果:玻璃离子粘接剂组界面缝隙宽度大于树脂加强玻璃离子组、Panavia F组和Super-Bond C&B组的宽度(P<0.01),树脂加强玻璃离子组界面缝隙宽度大于Panavia F组和Super-Bond C&B组的宽度(P<0.01),Panavia F组界面缝隙宽度大于Super-Bond C&B组的宽度(P<0.01)。结论:树脂类粘接剂组的边缘微渗漏明显小于玻璃离子组,但树脂加强型玻璃离子的边缘微渗漏大于Panavia F和Super-Bond C&B组,在后两者中,从减小边缘微渗漏方面,Super-Bond C&B更具有优势。
Objective： To study the the marginal microleakage of metal crowns using four different cements by quantitative observation under SEM.Methods： Four different cements（glass ionomer cement,resin-modified glass ionomer cement,Panavia F,Super-Bond CB） were used to adhere Porcelain-Fused-to-metal crowns.The leakage width between the cement and the surface of teeth was observed under SEM.The statistical result was set by SPSS 11.5 and the data in 4 groups were compared by one-way analysis of variance.Results： The width were highly significant in glass ionomer cement group than that in the other three cements（P0.01）.The width were highly significant in resin-modified glass ionomer cement group than that in Panavia F and Super-Bond CB.The width were highly significant in Panavia F group than that in Super-Bond CB（P0.01）.Conclusion： Adhesive resin luting system is better than glass ionomer cement at Porcelain-Fused-to-metal crown,Super-Bond CB is better in decreasing marginal microleakage than Panavia F.
出处
《实用口腔医学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2011年第2期169-172,共4页
Journal of Practical Stomatology
基金
辽宁省教育厅科学研究计划资助项目(编号:2008394)
关键词
边缘微渗漏
树脂粘接系统
金属烤瓷冠
扫描电镜
温度循环实验
Marginal microleakage
Adhesive resin luting system
Porcelain-fused-to-metal crown
Scanning electronic microscopy
Temperature cycling test
