■这项研究评估了使用三种不同类型的树脂保护剂(预热复合材料,双重固化粘合剂树脂,和可流动的复合材料)。
■使用对接准备设计准备了48个大小相等的上颌第一前磨牙。牙齿分为两个主要组,每颗有24颗牙齿:DDS组-延迟牙本质密封(DDS)(非IDS)牙齿未治疗。IDS组-牙本质密封在牙齿准备后立即应用。随后将每组分为三个独立的亚组,每组八颗牙齿。子组DDS+Phc和IDS+Phc-用预热复合材料胶结(搪瓷加HRi,云母,意大利),子组DDS+Dcrs和IDS+Dcrs-用双固化树脂水泥胶结(RelyXUltimate,3MESPE,德国),和亚组DDS+Fc和IDS+Fc-用可流动复合材料胶结(FiltekSupremeFlowable,3MESPE,美国)。每个样品的抗断裂性使用单一负载测试进行评估,直到失败,由计算机控制的通用测试系统自动记录在牛顿中。
■IDS+Phc亚组的抗断裂性是最高的平均值,其中覆盖层用预热复合材料(1954N)胶结,最低的平均值在DDS+Fc亚组中,通过这种方法,覆盖层用无IDS(887N)的可流动复合材料胶结。所有IDS亚组均具有较高的平均骨折负荷。Bonferroni检验和单向ANOVA检验均确定所有组之间的显著差异为0.05。
■一般来说,有IDS的牙齿比没有IDS的牙齿更强壮。当预热的复合材料用作粘合剂时,可提高整体抗断裂性,其次是树脂水泥和可流动复合材料,分别。然而,结果表明,有和没有IDS的陶瓷覆盖层都足够坚固,可以承受正常的咀嚼力。叠加在更灾难性的情况下失败了,无法修复的骨折方式比临床情况。
UNASSIGNED: This study evaluates the effects of immediate dentin sealing (IDS) on the fracture resistance of lithium disilicate overlays using three different types of resin-luting agents (preheated composite, dual-cure adhesive resin, and flowable composite).
UNASSIGNED: Forty-eight maxillary first premolars of equal size were prepared using a butt joint preparation design. The teeth were separated into two primary groups, each with 24 teeth: Group DDS - delay dentin sealing (DDS) (non-IDS) teeth were not treated. Group IDS - dentin sealing was applied immediately after teeth preparations. Each group was subsequently separated into three separate subgroups of eight teeth. Subgroups DDS+Phc and IDS+Phc - cemented with preheated composite (Enamel plus HRi, Micerium, Italy), subgroups DDS+Dcrs and IDS+Dcrs - cemented with dual-cured resin cement (RelyX Ultimate, 3M ESPE, Germany), and subgroups DDS+Fc and IDS+Fc - cemented with flowable composite (Filtek Supreme Flowable, 3M ESPE, USA). The fracture resistance of each sample was evaluated using a test of a single load till failure, which was automatically recorded in Newton by a computer-controlled universal testing system.
UNASSIGNED: The fracture resistance of the subgroup IDS+Phc was the highest mean value, in which the overlay was cemented with preheated composite (1954 N), and the lowest mean was noted in the subgroup DDS+Fc, by which the overlay cemented with flowable composite without IDS (887 N). All IDS subgroups had a high mean fracture load. Both the Bonferroni test and the one-way ANOVA test identified a significant difference between all groups of 0.05.
UNASSIGNED: In general, teeth with IDS were stronger than teeth without IDS. When the preheated composite is used as a luting agent improves overall fracture resistance, followed by resin cement and flowable composite, respectively. However, the result showed that the ceramic overlays with and without IDS are strong enough to withstand the normal mastication force. Overlays was failed in a more catastrophic, irreparable mode of fracture than the clinical situation.