本文選題：唾液污染 + 復(fù)合樹脂類　； 參考：《北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(醫(yī)學(xué)版)》2017年01期

【摘要】：目的:了解不同種類的甲基丙烯酸酯復(fù)合樹脂間的粘接效果以及唾液污染界面后對其粘接強度的影響。方法:選用AP-X和P60兩種不同種類的甲基丙烯酸復(fù)合樹脂,用SE-Bond自酸蝕粘接系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行粘接。將AP-X樹脂固化后打磨表面,根據(jù)界面處理方式不同分為3個實驗組:直接粘接組、唾液污染組和唾液污染后75%乙醇擦拭組。對照組為在固化的AP-X樹脂表面即刻分層充填、光固化P60樹脂后形成的整塊樹脂材料。將上述樹脂塊切成數(shù)條1 mm×1 mm×14 mm的試樣,每組選取15條在掃描電鏡下觀察試樣側(cè)面兩種樹脂的粘接界面,另取15條測定其微拉伸強度,采用單因素方差分析法進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計學(xué)分析。結(jié)果:掃描電鏡觀察可見:對照組整塊樹脂材料APX與P60緊密地嵌合在一起;3個實驗組中,直接粘接組的兩種樹脂AP-X與P60緊密結(jié)合無縫隙,唾液污染組中的兩種樹脂粘接面存在明顯的縫隙和陷窩,唾液污染后經(jīng)75%乙醇擦拭后兩種樹脂的粘接面仍有大量間隙存在。各組復(fù)合樹脂試樣微拉伸強度分別為:對照組(84.07±1.57)MPa;實驗組中3個亞組:直接粘接組為(76.08±2.42)MPa,唾液污染組為(70.98±2.33)MPa,75%乙醇擦拭污染組為(71.08±2.33)MPa,其中,對照組與實驗組差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.001);直接粘接組的拉伸強度明顯高于唾液污染組和污染后75%乙醇擦拭組,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.001);唾液污染組和污染后75%乙醇擦拭組之間差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P=0.893)。結(jié)論:不同種類的甲基丙烯酸復(fù)合樹脂不但可以結(jié)合,而且可獲得較大的內(nèi)聚強度;樹脂界面打磨后仍可粘接,但微拉伸強度有所降低;唾液污染粘接界面明顯降低復(fù)合樹脂間的粘接強度,75%乙醇擦拭并不能消除其影響。
[Abstract]:Aim: to investigate the bonding effect of different kinds of methacrylate composite resins and the effect of saliva contaminated interface on the bonding strength. Methods: two kinds of methacrylic acid composite resins, AP-X and P60, were selected and bonded with SE-Bond self-etching system. The surface of AP-X resin was ground after curing and was divided into three groups according to the different treatment methods: direct bonding group, saliva pollution group and 75% ethanol wiping group after saliva contamination. The control group was the whole resin material formed after curing P60 resin and laminated filling immediately on the surface of cured AP-X resin. The resin blocks were cut into several samples of 1 mm 脳 1 mm 脳 14 mm, 15 of them were selected to observe the adhesion interface of the two kinds of resins under scanning electron microscope, the other 15 were taken to measure their microtensile strength, and the statistical analysis was carried out by single factor variance analysis. Results: the results of scanning electron microscope showed that APX and P60 of the whole resin material in the control group were tightly intercalated with P60, and that in the three experimental groups, the two kinds of resin AP-X and P60 in the direct bonding group were tightly bound to each other. In the saliva polluted group, there were obvious gaps and lacunae in the adhesive surfaces of the two resins, and a large number of gaps still existed in the adhesive surfaces of the two resins after the saliva contamination was wiped by 75% ethanol. The microtensile strength of the composite resin samples in each group was 84.07 鹵1.57 MPA in the control group, and 71.08 鹵2.33 MPa in the direct bonding group and 70.98 鹵2.33 MPA in the saliva polluted group, respectively, in the experimental group, 71.08 鹵2.33 MPa in the control group, and 71.08 鹵2.33 MPa in the salivary contaminated group, respectively. The tensile strength of the direct adhesion group was significantly higher than that of the saliva polluted group and 75% ethanol wipe group, the difference between the control group and the experimental group was statistically significant. There was no significant difference between salivary pollution group and 75% ethanol wiping group. Conclusion: different kinds of methacrylic acid composite resin not only can be combined, but also can obtain greater cohesive strength, the resin interface can still be bonded after grinding, but the tensile strength of the resin can be decreased. The effect of salivary contamination on the adhesion strength of the composite resin was obviously reduced by 75% ethanol wiping.
【作者單位】： 北京大學(xué)人民醫(yī)院口腔科;北京大學(xué)口腔醫(yī)學(xué)院·口腔醫(yī)院牙體牙髓科口腔數(shù)字化醫(yī)療技術(shù)和材料國家工程實驗室口腔數(shù)字醫(yī)學(xué)北京市重點實驗室;
【分類號】：R783.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 房伯君,翟俊輝,楊亞囡;3種正畸粘接劑抗唾液污染的剪切強度比較[J];上�？谇会t(yī)學(xué);2003年06期

2 劉玲;粘接前去除瓷貼面的唾液污染[J];國外醫(yī)學(xué).口腔醫(yī)學(xué)分冊;1999年05期

3 孫景楊;郭良微;劉寶峰;徐經(jīng)偉;;唾液污染后牙本質(zhì)表面不同處理方法對牙本質(zhì)剪切強度影響的研究[J];口腔醫(yī)學(xué)研究;2013年06期

4 王金山;;唾液污染對自酸蝕粘結(jié)劑粘結(jié)強度的影響[J];中國實用醫(yī)藥;2008年21期

5 孫景楊;郭良微;徐經(jīng)偉;劉寶峰;;唾液污染對牙本質(zhì)粘結(jié)界面影響的微形態(tài)觀察[J];口腔醫(yī)學(xué)研究;2013年07期

6 繆向英;徐愛鳳;朱f;葛麗華;侯本祥;;唾液污染對自酸蝕粘結(jié)劑樹脂充填后邊緣微滲漏的影響[J];北京口腔醫(yī)學(xué);2008年03期

7 周紅艷;劉茜;王玨;楊顏菁;梅予鋒;;唾液污染后再處理對窩溝封閉邊緣封閉性能影響的研究[J];口腔醫(yī)學(xué);2012年10期

8 平燕;;三種口腔正畸托粘接劑唾液污染后的剪切強度比較[J];四川醫(yī)學(xué);2014年01期

9 張伯文,于坤;公用電話被乙型肝炎表面抗原污染情況的調(diào)查[J];消毒與滅菌;1989年02期

10 齊娟,毛靖;唾液污染對運用自酸蝕粘接系統(tǒng)托槽/牙面剪切強度的影響[J];臨床口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2005年01期

相關(guān)會議論文 前1條

1 房伯君;孫艷靜;;正畸粘結(jié)劑抗唾液污染的剪切強度實驗研究[A];第四軍醫(yī)大學(xué)口腔醫(yī)院2004第七屆全國口腔正畸學(xué)術(shù)會議論文匯編[C];2004年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 江琴;唾液污染對4種自酸蝕粘結(jié)劑的釉質(zhì)粘結(jié)強度的影響[D];浙江大學(xué);2009年

2 鄧娜;唾液污染對正畸自酸蝕劑酸蝕粘結(jié)效果的影響[D];河北醫(yī)科大學(xué);2005年

3 吳志芳;唾液污染對一步法自酸蝕粘結(jié)劑的牙本質(zhì)微拉伸粘結(jié)強度的影響[D];浙江大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1840793