Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V non-carious lesions.
Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V non-carious lesions.
复制标题
三种粘合系统在 V 类非龋病变中的临床评价。
DOI：
10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00019-1
复制
发表时间：
2000
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. V. van Dijken
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. V. van Dijken
目的 本研究的目的是评估 3 年内非龋性宫颈病变中三种新型粘合系统的临床保留情况。 方法 将粘合系统、三步式 (EBS/Pertac Hybrid)、一瓶树脂粘合剂 (One-Step/Pertac Hybrid) 和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀 (Fuji II LC) 放置在 148 个非龋性宫颈病变、87 个牙本质硬化和61非硬化。在用两种树脂粘合系统处理的硬化病变中，有 37 个在调理前用金刚石车针稍微粗糙化。 3 年期间每 6 个月对修复体进行一次评估。结果 除 6 个修复体外，所有修复体在 3 年期间均进行了评估。 EBS、One-Step 和 Fuji II LC 的累积损失率在 1 年时分别为：2%、24% 和 2%，在 3 年时为：10%、49%、7%。一瓶粘合剂的失败率明显更高。五个丢失的 EBS 修复体位于非硬化病变中，而三个丢失的 Fuji II LC 修复体则位于硬化病变中。对于一步材料，非硬化病变与硬化病变的损失频率分别为 31.8% 和 65.2%。使用金刚石车针对硬化牙本质表面进行轻微粗糙化并不会增加修复体的固位。意义三步树脂粘合剂和 RMGIC 显示出临床上可接受的固位率，而一瓶粘合剂的失败率很高。
ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical retention of three new adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions during a 3-year period.MethodsThe adhesive systems, a three-step (EBS/Pertac Hybrid), a one-bottle resin bonding agent (One-Step/Pertac Hybrid) and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC) were placed in 148 non-carious cervical lesions, 87 with sclerotic dentin and 61 non-sclerotic. Of the sclerotic lesions treated with the two resin bonding systems, 37 were slightly roughened with a diamond bur before conditioning. The restorations were evaluated every 6months during a 3-year period.ResultsAll except six restorations were evaluated during the 3years. The cumulative loss rates for EBS, One-Step and Fuji II LC were, at 1year: 2, 24 and 2% and at 3years: 10, 49, 7%, respectively. The one-bottle adhesive showed significantly more failures. The five lost EBS restorations were found in non-sclerotic lesions, while the three lost Fuji II LC restorations had been placed in sclerotic lesions. For the One-Step material the loss frequency for non-sclerotic versus sclerotic lesions was 31.8 and 65.2%, respectively. Slight roughening of the sclerotic dentin surfaces with a diamond bur did not increase retention of the restorations.SignificanceThe three-step resin adhesive and the RMGIC showed clinically acceptable retention rates, while a high failure rate was registered for the one-bottle adhesive.