Effect of a fluoride- and bromide-containing adhesive system on enamel around composite restorations under high cariogenic challenge in situ.
Effect of a fluoride- and bromide-containing adhesive system on enamel around composite restorations under high cariogenic challenge in situ.
复制标题
在原位高致龋挑战下，含氟和溴化物粘合剂系统对复合修复体周围牙釉质的影响。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Giannini
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. F. Pinto;A. P. Paes Leme;G. Ambrosano;M. Giannini
目的
目的：评价新型抗菌释氟粘结剂在蔗糖暴露下(模拟高龋性条件)对牙釉质脱矿的影响。
材料和方法
这项交叉、盲法研究分两个阶段进行，共14天。志愿者(n=14)佩戴包含四个牛牙釉质块的口腔内矫治器，并使用自酸蚀底漆/复合树脂(Clearfi SE Bond或Clearfi Protect Bond/ClearfilAP-X)修复口腔准备。志愿者滴20%蔗糖溶液8次/天，使用含氟牙膏3次/天。14d后，通过断面显微硬度(CSMH)检测釉质矿物质丢失情况，并用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和偏光显微镜(PLM)观察修复体牙釉质脱矿区的情况。CSMH数据采用方差分析和Tukey‘s检验(p<；0.05)。
结果
仅在第一个显微硬度测量部位和接近釉质表面(20微米)时，使用Clearfi Protect Bond修复的釉质块在修复体附近的矿物质含量(%VOL)高于Clearfi SE Bond。扫描电子显微镜和PLM分析表明，Clearfi Protect Bond粘结剂可减少修复体牙釉质的脱矿。
结论
在14天的致龋性挑战后，研究结果表明，在有高龋齿风险的情况下，Clearfi Protect Bond可能有助于控制修复体周围的脱矿。
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of a novel antibacterial and fluoride-releasing adhesive formulation on enamel demineralization under sucrose exposure in situ (simulating high caries risk conditions).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This crossover, blind study was performed in two phases of 14 days. Volunteers (n = 14) wore an intraoral appliance containing four bovine enamel blocks with cavity preparations restored using self-etching primers/composite resin (Clearfil SE Bond or Clearfil Protect Bond/Clearfil AP-X). The volunteers dropped 20% sucrose solution 8x/day and used fluoridated dentifrice 3x/day. After 14 days, enamel mineral loss was assessed by cross-sectional microhardness (CSMH), and the demineralization areas in enamel adjacent to the restoration were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and polarizing light microscopy (PLM). The CSMH data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05).
RESULTS
Enamel blocks restored with Clearfil Protect Bond showed higher mineral content (%vol) adjacent to restorations than Clearfil SE Bond only for the first site of microhardness measurement and close to enamel surface (20 microm). SEM and PLM analysis suggested that the Clearfil Protect Bond adhesive promoted less enamel demineralization around restorations.
CONCLUSION
After 14 days of cariogenic challenge, the findings suggested that Clearfil Protect Bond might help to control the demineralization around restorations in cases of high caries risk.