上海口腔医学 ›› 2017, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (4): 404-408.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2017.04.011

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

纳米流动树脂及2种不同黏结剂对断冠再接黏结强度的影响

赵是民, 黄晓, 陈晖, 汪俊   

  1. 上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院·口腔医学院 儿童口腔科, 上海市口腔医学重点实验室,上海市口腔医学研究所,国家口腔疾病临床研究中心,上海 200011
  • 收稿日期:2016-11-11 修回日期:2017-03-18 出版日期:2017-08-25 发布日期:2017-09-01
  • 通讯作者: 汪俊,E-mail: wangjun202@126.com
  • 作者简介:赵是民(1978-),女,硕士,住院医师,E-mail:13501834830@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院临床+项目(JYLJ010)

Effect of flowablenano-composite on the bonding strength of tooth reattachment on fractured crowns

ZHAO Shi-min, HUANG Xiao, CHEN Hui, WANG Jun   

  1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine; Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology and Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology; National Clinical Research Center of Stomatology. Shanghai 200011, China
  • Received:2016-11-11 Revised:2017-03-18 Online:2017-08-25 Published:2017-09-01

摘要: 目的研究纳米流动树脂及不同黏结剂对断冠再接黏结强度的影响。方法体外建立34个上切牙冠折模型,随机分为4组,分别使用2种树脂黏结剂Easy One(EO)或Single bond2 (SB2)直接断冠再接,或涂布不同黏结剂后断面注塑Filtek Z350纳米流动树脂进行断冠再接。各样本在再接4d后测试剪切力大小,计算再接后强度恢复率(R)。采用SPSS 20.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果使用纳米流动树脂未显著增加2种黏结剂用于断冠再接的剪切力及强度恢复率,但再接后牙体强度恢复率最高者为EO直接再接组,其效果显著高于SB2直接再接组(P=0.046)。结论当折断片能与断面完全吻合时,单独使用EO进行断冠再接,能获得较高的黏结强度。但并非所有树脂黏结剂可不使用树脂直接进行断冠再接,在临床选择时,应从选用树脂黏结剂是否具有足够的机械性能及外伤牙是否有牙体组织的丢失两方面考虑。

关键词: 断冠再接, 树脂黏结剂, 纳米流动树脂, 剪切力, 强度恢复率

Abstract: To study the effect of flowable nano-composite and different resin adhesives on reattachment of fractured crowns. METHODS: Thirty four fractured human maxillary incisors were obtained and randomly assigned into 4 groups and reattached using two types of adhesives: Easy one (EO) and Single bond 2(SB2), with or without Filtek Z350 flowable nano-composite. Four days after reattaching, the teeth were tested to achieve the shear bonding strength (SBS) and the recovery rate of fracture resistance after reattachment (R) were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed by use of SPSS 20.0 software package. RESULTS: Using flowable nano-composite failed to increase the SBS and R.The recovery rates of the specimens using EO without flowable composite achieved the highest value and they were significantly higher than those of the specimens using SB2 without flowable composite (P=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: If the fragment matches the fractured tooth perfectly, the tooth reattached using EO without composite will achieve higher bonding strength. However, not all the adhesives can be used to reattach without composite. Clinical decisions should be made on two aspects: whether the selected adhesive has sufficient mechanical strength and if there is any loss of tooth tissue after fracture.

Key words: Reattachment of fractured crown, Resin adhesives, Flowable nano-composite, Shear bonding strength, Recovery rate of fracture resistance

中图分类号: