Journal of dentistry · 2002
Effects of one versus two applications of an unfilled, all-in-one adhesive on dentine bonding.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pashley Edna L, Agee Kelli A, Pashley David H, Tay Franklin R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the effect of a one versus two-layer applications of Prompt L-Pop (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) to sound, abraded human coronal dentine.
METHODS: In group I, the mixed adhesive was applied for 15s, and light-cured for 10s. In group II, after light-curing the first layer, the adhesive was re-applied and light-cured. Specimens bonded with a hybrid composite were sectioned into beams for microtensile bond strength evaluation. Additional teeth from each group were bonded similarly using a lining composite for transmission electron microscopy examination of the resin-dentine interfaces, and nanoleakage evaluation using ammoniacal silver nitrate.
RESULTS: A significant difference (p<0.001) was detected between microtensile bond strengths in the two groups. Stained, demineralized sections revealed 3-5 microm thick hybrid layers in both groups. An electron-lucent layer between 7 and 20 microm thick was present between the adhesive and the overlying composite. This layer was absent from the interfaces after removal with ethanol before composite placement. The use of a single application in group I resulted in the direct contact of the electron-lucent layer with the dentine surface and tubular orifices. In unstained, undemineralized sections used to evaluate nanoleakage, silver deposits were found mostly in the hybrid layer in group II, but throughout the entire adhesive layer in group I.
CONCLUSION: Bonding of this unfilled all-in-one adhesive to dentine may be improved by application of a second adhesive layer after light-curing the first layer. This ensures that the exposed dentine surface and dentinal tubules are coated with adhesive that is adequately polymerized.
METHODS: In group I, the mixed adhesive was applied for 15s, and light-cured for 10s. In group II, after light-curing the first layer, the adhesive was re-applied and light-cured. Specimens bonded with a hybrid composite were sectioned into beams for microtensile bond strength evaluation. Additional teeth from each group were bonded similarly using a lining composite for transmission electron microscopy examination of the resin-dentine interfaces, and nanoleakage evaluation using ammoniacal silver nitrate.
RESULTS: A significant difference (p<0.001) was detected between microtensile bond strengths in the two groups. Stained, demineralized sections revealed 3-5 microm thick hybrid layers in both groups. An electron-lucent layer between 7 and 20 microm thick was present between the adhesive and the overlying composite. This layer was absent from the interfaces after removal with ethanol before composite placement. The use of a single application in group I resulted in the direct contact of the electron-lucent layer with the dentine surface and tubular orifices. In unstained, undemineralized sections used to evaluate nanoleakage, silver deposits were found mostly in the hybrid layer in group II, but throughout the entire adhesive layer in group I.
CONCLUSION: Bonding of this unfilled all-in-one adhesive to dentine may be improved by application of a second adhesive layer after light-curing the first layer. This ensures that the exposed dentine surface and dentinal tubules are coated with adhesive that is adequately polymerized.