대한소아치과학회지 (Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry)

  • 제48권4호
  • /
  • Pages.397-404
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1226-8496(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-3819(eISSN)
대한소아치과학회 (Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

염화알루미늄 지혈제가 유치와 레진강화형 글라스아이오노머 시멘트의 결합강도에 미치는 영향

Effect of Aluminum Chloride Hemostatic Agent on Bonding Strength of RMGIC in Primary Tooth

  • 우승희 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 신지선 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 이준행 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 한미란 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김종수 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실)
  • Woo, Seung-Hee (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Shin, Jisun (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Lee, Joonhaeng (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Han, Miran (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Jong Soo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 투고 : 2021.06.02
  • 심사 : 2021.08.09
  • 발행 : 2021.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구의 목적은 유치의 상아질면에서 염화알루미늄 지혈제의 적용이 레진강화형 글라스아이오노머(RMGIC)의 결합에 미치는 영향을 전단결합강도, 주사전자현미경(SEM), 에너지분산형 분광분석기(EDS)를 통하여 평가하는 것이다. 36개의 유구치가 이용되었으며, 상아질이 노출되도록 시편을 제작하여 상아질 전처리과정에 따라 4개의 군으로 분류하였다. I, II, III, IV군은 각각 전처리를 하지 않은 군, 25% polyacrylic acid(PAA)를 10초간 적용한 군, 21.3% 염화알루미늄 지혈제를 1분간 적용한 군, IV군은 염화알루미늄 지혈제를 1분간 사용한 뒤 PAA를 10초간 적용한 군으로 설정하였다. 각 군당 15개의 시편에 RMGIC를 중합하여 전단결합강도를 측정하였다. 각 군당 3개의 시편을 SEM/EDS 분석하였다. II군, IV군, I군, III군 순서로 결합강도가 유의하게 높았다. SEM 촬영으로 염화알루미늄 지혈제를 적용한 군들은 도말층이 일부 제거 되었음을 확인하였다. EDS 분석결과, 염화알루미늄 지혈제 적용 후 칼슘의 감소 및 염소와 알루미늄의 증가가 확인되었고, PAA 사용후에도 증가한 염소는 감소하지 않음을 관찰하였다. 연구를 통해 염화알루미늄 지혈제는 PAA의 사용에 관계없이 상아질에서 RMGIC의 전단결합강도를 감소시키는 것을 알 수 있다.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a hemostatic agent containing aluminum chloride on the shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) to the dentin of primary teeth. Thirty-six extracted non-carious human primary teeth were collected in this study. Dentin surfaces were cut and polished. The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups; group I: RMGIC without conditioning; group II: polyacrylic acid (PAA), RMGIC; group III: aluminum chloride, RMGIC; group IV: aluminum chloride, PAA, RMGIC. All teeth were thermocycled between 5.0℃ and 55.0℃ for 5000 cycles. Fifteen specimens from each group were subjected to shear bond strength test and 3 specimens from each group were inspected using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. The mean shear bond strength of each group was as follows: 4.04 ± 0.88 MPa in group I, 8.29 ± 1.40 MPa in group II, 1.39 ± 0.47 MPa in group III, 6.24 ± 2.76 MPa in group IV. There were significant differences among all groups (p < 0.001). SEM image of the dentinal tubules were partially exposed in group III and group IV. Fully exposed dentinal tubules were found in group II. In conclusion, aluminum chloride decreased the shear bond strength of RMGIC to dentin, regardless of PAA conditioning.

키워드

과제정보

The Department of Dentistry (Pediatric dentistry) was supported through the Research-Focused Department Promotion Project as a part of the University Innovation Support Program for Dankook University in 2021.

참고문헌

  1. Mathis RS, Ferracane JL : Properties of a glass-ionomer/resin- composite hybrid material. Dent mater, 5:355-358, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(89)90130-9
  2. Santos VR, Lucchesi JA, Duarte PM, et al. : Effects of glass ionomer and microfilled composite subgingival restorations on periodontal tissue and subgingival biofilm: a 6-month evaluation. J Periodontol, 78:1522-1528, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.070032
  3. Palm MD, Altman JS : Topical hemostatic agents: a review. Dermatol Surg, 34:431-445, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1097/00042728-200804000-00001
  4. Tarighi P, Khoroushi M : A review on common chemical hemostatic agents in restorative dentistry. Dent Res J, 11:423-428, 2014.
  5. Woycheshin FF : An evaluation of the drugs used for gingival retraction. J Prosthet Dent, 14:769-776, 1964. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(64)90213-6
  6. Land MF, Couri CC, Johnston WM : Smear layer instability caused by hemostatic agents. J Prosthet Dent, 76:477-482, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90004-9
  7. Woody RD, Miller A, Staffanou RS : Review of the pH of hemostatic agents used in tissue displacement. J Prosthet Dent, 70:191-192, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90018-J
  8. Larson PO : Topical hemostatic agents for dermatologic surgery. J Dermatol surg Oncol, 14:623-632, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.1988.tb03390.x
  9. Henley J, Brewer JD : Newer hemostatic agents used in the practice of dermatologic surgery. Dermatol Res Pract, 2013:279289, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/279289
  10. Ajami AA, Kahnamoii MA, Firouzmandi M, et al. : Effect of three different contamination removal methods on bond strength of a self-etching adhesive to dentin contaminated with an aluminum chloride hemostatic agent. J Contemp Dent Pract, 14:26-33, 2013. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1264
  11. Kuphasuk W, Harnirattisai C, Senawongse P, Tagami J : Bond strengths of two adhesive systems to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic agent. Oper Dent, 32:399-405, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2341/06-121
  12. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC : The effect of tooth-preparation cleansing protocol on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic agent. Oper Dent, 36:18-26, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2341/09-308-LR1
  13. Park EY, Kang S : Current aspects and prospects of glass ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. Yeungnam Univ J Med, 37:169-178, 2020. https://doi.org/10.12701/yujm.2020.00374
  14. Saad A, Inoue G, Tagami J, et al. : Effect of dentin contamination with two hemostatic agents on bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cement with different conditioning. Dent Mater J, 38:257-263, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2018-059
  15. O'Keefe KL, Pinzon LM, Rivera B, Powers JM : Bond strength of composite to astringent-contaminated dentin using self-etching adhesive. Am J Dent, 18:168-172, 2005.
  16. Salama FS : Influence of zinc-oxide eugenol, formocresol, and ferric sulfate on bond strength of dentin adhesives to primary teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract, 6:14-21, 2005. https://doi.org/10.5005/jcdp-6-3-14
  17. Kimmes NS, Olson TL, Shaddy RS, Latta MA : Effect of ViscoStat and ViscoStat Plus on composite shear bond strength in the presence and absence of blood. J Adhes Dent, 8:363-366, 2006.
  18. Prabhakar AR, Bedi S : Effect of glutaraldehyde and ferric sulfate on shear bond strength of adhesives to primary dentin. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent, 26:109-113, 2007.
  19. Martin RB : The chemistry of aluminum as related to biology and medicine. Clin Chem, 32:1797-1806, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/32.10.1797
  20. Ebrahimi SF, Shadman N, Abrishami A : Effect of ferric sulfate contamination on the bonding effectiveness of etchand- rinse and self-etch adhesives to superficial dentin. J Conserv Dent, 16:126-130, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.108190
  21. Coutinho E, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B, et al. : Development of a self-etch adhesive for resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res, 85:349-353, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500413
  22. Lin A, McIntyre NS, Davidson RD : Studies on the adhesion of glass-ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res, 71:1836- 1841, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710111401
  23. Ayo-Yusuf OA, Driessen CH, Botha AJ : SEM-EDX study of prepared human dentine surfaces exposed to gingival retraction fluids. J Dent, 33:731-739, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.02.002
  24. Harnirattisai C, Kuphasuk W, Senawongse P, Tagami J : Bond strengths of resin cements to astringent-contaminated dentin. Oper Dent, 34:415-422, 2009. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-107
  25. Melkumyan TV, Dadamova AD, Kamilov KP : The influence of a hemostatic agent on adhesion strength and microleakage of composite resin restorations. Int J Biomed, 8:335-357, 2018.