American journal of dentistry · 1999
Effects of handpiece lubrication on resin-based composite bond strength to enamel.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Knight J S, Draughn R, Evans M D
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of handpiece lubrication on the bond strengths of resin-based composite (RBC) to enamel using two different bonding systems.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty extracted noncarious human maxillary incisors were imbedded in acrylic resin tray material with the facial surfaces exposed. 320 grit sandpaper was used to create a flat surface of enamel. The embedded teeth were randomly divided into two bonding systems groups: half used All-Bond 2 and half used OpiBond FL. Within these two groups the teeth were again randomly divided into three subgroups: Dry: 10 teeth prepared with a sterilized unlubricated handpiece; Lube & Run: 10 teeth prepared with a handpiece that was lubricated and run for 30 seconds prior to use; Lube: 10 teeth prepared with a handpiece that was lubricated and not run prior to its use. The enamel was prepared by lightly roughening with a medium grit diamond in the respective handpieces. The preparations were etched for 15 s with 32% phosphoric acid, rinsed with water for 5 s, and dried with compressed air for 5 s. Either bond system was applied and light-cured. A hybrid RBC was placed and light-cured for 60 s. The teeth were stored in water at 37 degrees C 1 week. Shear bond strengths were measured and the collected data subjected to an ANOVA followed by a Tukey's and Bonferroni t-test were performed.
RESULTS: The Dry group and the Lube & Run group had stronger mean shear strengths than did the Lube group. The difference between the mean shear strengths for the Dry group and the Lube & Run group was not statistically significant (P < 0.05). A significant difference was found between the Dry group and the Lube group and between the Lube & Run group and the Lube group (P < 0.05). The mean shear strength for All-Bond 2 was higher than for OptiBond FL (P = 0.0054).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty extracted noncarious human maxillary incisors were imbedded in acrylic resin tray material with the facial surfaces exposed. 320 grit sandpaper was used to create a flat surface of enamel. The embedded teeth were randomly divided into two bonding systems groups: half used All-Bond 2 and half used OpiBond FL. Within these two groups the teeth were again randomly divided into three subgroups: Dry: 10 teeth prepared with a sterilized unlubricated handpiece; Lube & Run: 10 teeth prepared with a handpiece that was lubricated and run for 30 seconds prior to use; Lube: 10 teeth prepared with a handpiece that was lubricated and not run prior to its use. The enamel was prepared by lightly roughening with a medium grit diamond in the respective handpieces. The preparations were etched for 15 s with 32% phosphoric acid, rinsed with water for 5 s, and dried with compressed air for 5 s. Either bond system was applied and light-cured. A hybrid RBC was placed and light-cured for 60 s. The teeth were stored in water at 37 degrees C 1 week. Shear bond strengths were measured and the collected data subjected to an ANOVA followed by a Tukey's and Bonferroni t-test were performed.
RESULTS: The Dry group and the Lube & Run group had stronger mean shear strengths than did the Lube group. The difference between the mean shear strengths for the Dry group and the Lube & Run group was not statistically significant (P < 0.05). A significant difference was found between the Dry group and the Lube group and between the Lube & Run group and the Lube group (P < 0.05). The mean shear strength for All-Bond 2 was higher than for OptiBond FL (P = 0.0054).