摘要
目的:比较不同脱敏剂与蜂胶对牙本质小管的封闭性。方法:选取因正畸治疗而拔出的48颗牙,制备成为牙本质过敏模型,随机分为4组(3组为实验组,1组为空白对照组),分别用Bi fl uori d1(2双氟剂)脱敏剂(A组)、Gl uma脱敏剂(B组)、蜂胶(C组)三种试剂对实验组暴露的牙本质表面进行处理并做刷牙实验,然后用扫描电镜观察牙本质小管的封闭情况。结果:两种脱敏剂与蜂胶均在牙本质表面形成封闭。A、B、C组在牙本质小管内形成"树脂突"样结构,其中A组和C组渗入较深,B组较浅。结论:两种脱敏剂和蜂胶都能取得封闭牙本质小管的效能,其中Bi fl uori d1(2双氟剂)脱敏剂的封闭性、耐久性较佳。
Objective To compare the different desensitizers and the propolis for the dentinal tubules＇ closed. Methods Select 48 teeth pulled out by orthodontic treatment and produce dentin hypersensitivity model, randomly divide them into four groups （three experimental groups, a group of the blank control group）.Use three reagents,the Bifluorid desensitizer （group A）, the Gluma desensitizer （group B）,the propolis （group C）,proceed treatment about the dentin surface exposed by the experimental group, observe the closed situation of the dentin tubule by scanning through electron microscope. Results Both two desensitizers and the propolis form closed in dentin surface. Group A, B, C formed resin convex structure （resin outstanding） within the dentinal tubules, wherein the group A and the group C are deeper,while group B is shallow. Conclusion Both the two desensitizers and propolis also can obtain the efficiency of closed dentinal tubules,and the character including closure and durability of Bifluorid desensitizer is better.
出处
《中国美容医学》
CAS
2013年第1期62-64,共3页
Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine
关键词
脱敏剂
蜂胶
牙本质过敏.
desensitizer
propolis
dentin hypersensitivity
