Overestimating hybrid layer quality in polished adhesive/dentin interfaces
Overestimating hybrid layer quality in polished adhesive/dentin interfaces
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jbm.a.20105
复制
发表时间：
2004-03-15
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Spencer, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wang, Y;Spencer, P
用于确定混合层 (HL) 质量的最流行的技术依赖于酸漂白化学处理前后抛光粘合剂/牙本质 (a/d) 界面的形态特征。使用这些技术，大多数粘合剂系统都一致报道了光滑、耐酸层的存在。本研究的目的是确定流行的样品制备技术（包括抛光和酸漂白处理）是否会改变 A/D 界面，掩盖 HL 的复杂性，并导致 HL 质量评估不准确。为了了解标本制备技术对树脂-牙本质界面形态的影响，在不同的酸漂白化学处理程序后，对同一牙齿的抛光和未抛光标本进行了密切比较。本研究使用了两种一瓶粘合剂，即 3M Single Bond 和 Pulpdent UNO，它们在亲水/疏水成分上表现出明显的差异。使用来自同一牙齿的标本，通过扫描电子显微镜研究了化学处理对树脂-牙本质相互扩散区形态的影响以及经过相同处理的抛光和未抛光标本的形态差异。结果表明，包括抛光和酸漂白处理在内的传统样品制备技术会对具有多孔 HL 的样品中的 A/D 界面的结构细节产生不利影响，甚至模糊其结构细节。结果表明，Pulpdent UNO/牙本质界面的质量优于 3M Single Bond/牙本质界面。 HL 质量的差异可归因于成分差异等因素，这些因素会影响湿法粘合过程中基材内与水的粘合剂相互作用。本研究通过使用多步技术克服了传统酸漂白程序无法揭示扫描电子显微镜界面形态差异的问题。 (C) 2004 年 Wiley 期刊公司。
The most popular techniques for determining the quality of the hybrid layer (HL) have relied on morphologic characterization of the polished adhesive/dentin (a/d) interfaces before and after acid-bleach chemical treatment. Using these techniques, the existence of smooth, acid-resistant layers has been consistently reported for most adhesive systems. The purpose of this study was to determine whether popular specimen preparation techniques that include polishing and acid-bleach treatment modify the a/d interface, mask the complexity of the HL, and lead to inaccurate assessment of the quality of the HL. To understand the impact of specimen preparation techniques on the morphology of the resin-dentin interface, polished and unpolished specimens from the same tooth were closely compared after different acid-bleach chemical treatment procedures. Two one-bottle adhesives, that is, 3M Single Bond and Pulpdent UNO, exhibiting distinct differences in hydrophilic/hydrophobic composition, were used in this investigation. Using specimens from the same tooth, the effect of chemical treatments on the morphology of the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone and the differences in the morphology of polished and unpolished specimens after these same treatments were studied with scanning electron microscopy. It was shown that conventional specimen preparation techniques that include polishing and acid-bleach treatment can adversely affect and even obscure the structural detail of the a/d interface in specimens that possess a porous HL. The results indicated that the Pulpdent UNO/dentin interface had better quality than the 3M Single Bond/dentin interface. The difference in the quality of HL can be attributed to factors such as compositional differences that impact the adhesive interaction with water, that is present within the substrate during wet bonding. The inability of the conventional acid-bleach procedure to reveal the differences in the scanning electron microscopy interfacial morphology was overcome in this investigation by using a multistep technique. (C) 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.