Abstract:

Abstract：Objective To compare the effect of 4 kinds of dentin adhesive on the microleakage of Ceramage polymerization porcelain inlay and provide the reference for the clinical choice of adhesive. Methods Totally 40 premolar teeth were collected，which developed normally and had no caries but should be extracted because of orthodontic. The teeth were randomly divided into 4 groups，each group 10. Class Ⅱhole was made in 40 teeth and resin inlays were made with Ceramage polymerization porcelain. Respectively，each group were coated with dentin adhesive--Prime & Bond coated NT（NT），Adper Single Bond 2（SB2），Clearfil SE Bond（SE），Clearfil S3 Bond（S3）. Rely X ARC resin was used to cohere inlays. All the test-pieces，after 500 thermal cycles and fuchsin staining，were longitudinally split 2 times with emery sheets，measuring depth of dye penetration into shaft wall and gingival wall under optical microscope. Results Shaft walls： microleakage variance were statistically significant in the 4 groups（F = 8.3125，P < 0.01）. The microleakage level in group S3 was significantly higher than in group SB（q = 6.4032），group SE（q = 5.7708）and group NT（q = 4.0316） （P < 0.01），but no significant difference among the other three groups. Gingival walls：no statistically significant differences were shown in different adhesive microleakage（F = 0.5897，P > 0.05）；for the same adhesive，gingival microleakage degree was significantly higher than shaft wall（P < 0.01）. Conclusion Clearfil S3 Bond on the sealing effect of enamel is poor. Evaluated from the microleakage depth size and operation method，Clearfil SE Bond is an ideal dentin adhesive for resin inlay.

Key words: dentin adhesive, polymerization porcelain, microleakage

摘要：

目的 通过对比4种牙本质黏结剂处理牙面后Ceramage聚合瓷嵌体的微渗漏程度，为黏结剂的临床选择提供参考。方法 收集2012年7—9月在周口市第二人民医院口腔科因正畸需要拔除的牙体发育正常、无龋的前磨牙40颗，随机分为4组，每组10颗。40颗离体牙均按照嵌体备洞原则制备近中邻牙合Ⅱ类洞，Ceramage聚合瓷制作树脂嵌体，各组分别涂布牙本质黏结剂Prime & Bond NT、Adper Single Bond 2、Clearfil SE Bond、Clearfil S3 Bond，用Rely X ARC树脂水门汀黏结嵌体。所有试件经冷热循环500次及品红染色后，金刚砂片平行于牙体长轴沿近远中方向将修复体纵向剖开2次，在体视显微镜下测量染料渗入轴壁、龈壁的深度。结果 轴壁：4组的微渗漏程度比较，差异有统计学意义（F = 8.3125，P < 0.01）；Clearfil S3 Bond组的微渗漏程度高于Clearfil SE Bond（q = 5.7708）、Adper Single Bond 2（q = 6.4032）和Prime & Bond NT组（q = 4.0316），差异有统计学意义（P < 0.01），而其他3组间差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。龈壁：不同黏结剂之间的微渗漏差异无统计学意义（F = 0.5897，P > 0.05）。同种黏结剂的龈壁微渗漏程度均显著高于轴壁，配对t 检验显示差异有统计学意义（P < 0.01）。结论 Clearfil S3 Bond对牙釉质的封闭效果较差；从微渗漏深度大小和操作方法上进行评价，Clearfil SE Bond是黏结树脂嵌体较理想的牙本质黏结剂。

关键词: 牙本质黏结剂, 聚合瓷, 微渗漏