• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제6권2호
• /
• pp.88-95
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if pre-treatment with desensitizers have a negative effect on microtensile bond strength before cementing a restoration using recently introduced self-adhesive resin cement to dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-five human molars' occlusal surfaces were ground to expose dentin; and were randomly grouped as (n=5); 1) Gluma-(Glutaraldehyde/HEMA) 2) Aqua-Prep F-(Fluoride), 3) Bisblock-(Oxalate), 4) Cervitec Plus-(Clorhexidine), 5) Smart protect-(Triclosan), 6) Nd:YAG laser, 7) No treatment (control). After applying the selected agent, RelyX U200 self-adhesive resin cement was used to bond composite resin blocks to dentin. All groups were subjected to thermocycling for 1000 cycles between $5-55^{\circ}C$. Each bonded specimen was sectioned to microbars ($6mm{\times}1mm{\times}1mm$) (n=20). Specimens were submitted to microtensile bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Levene's test, Kruskal-Wallis One-way Analysis of Variance, and Conover's nonparametric statistical analysis were used (P<.05). RESULTS. Gluma, Smart Protect and Nd:YAG laser treatments showed comparable microtensile bond strengths compared with the control group (P>.05). The microtensile bond strengths of Aqua-Prep F, and Cervitec Plus were similar to each other but significantly lower than the control group (P<.05). Bisblock showed the lowest microtensile bond strength among all groups (P<.001). Most groups showed adhesive failure. CONCLUSION. Within the limitation of this study, it is not recommended to use Aqua-prep F, Cervitec Plus and Bisblock on dentin when used with a self-adhesive resin cement due to the decrease they cause in bond strength. Beside, pre-treatment of dentin with Gluma, Smart protect, and Nd:YAG laser do not have a negative effect.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제40권4호
• /
• pp.260-266
• /
• 2010

본 연구의 목적은 서로 다른 종류의 접착시스템과 법랑질 보호제 등이 설측 브라켓의 인장강도에 영향을 미치는지 알아보는데 있다. 75개의 발치된 하악 전치를 5개의 그룹으로 임의로 나눈 후 설측 브라켓을 부착하였다. Group 1은 Transbond XT를, Group 2는 Transbond XT와 함께 불소 유리레진(Ortho-coat)을 Group 3는 Transbond XT와 Chlorohexidine varnish (Cervitec Plus)를 Group 4는 광중합 접착제(Aegis Ortho)를 Group 5는 antimicrobial self-etching primer (Clearfil Protect Bond)을 사용하였다. 불소유리 레진이나 Chlorohexidine varnish의 사용유무는 접착력에 영향을 미치지 못하였다. Group 5이 다른 그룹에 비해 접착력과 접착제 잔류지수(adhesive remnant index, ARI)가 통계적으로 유의하게 높았다 (p < 0.001). 법랑질 보호제 적용 시 설측 브라켓의 접착력에 부정적인 영향을 미치지 못하였다. 이상의 결과로 이번에 사용한 제품들은 설측 교정치료 기간 동안 환자의 구강위생을 개선시킬 수 있어 환자와 술자에게 도움을 줄 수 있을 것이다. 그러나 에나멜 층이 얇은 경우 Clearfil Protect Bond의 과도한 접착강도에 대해 고려해야 할 것이다.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제7권4호
• /
• pp.323-328
• /
• 2015

PURPOSE. This in-vitro study was designed to evaluate retention forces, microleakage and plastic deformation of a prefabricated 2-implant bar attachment system (SFI-Bar, Cendres+$M{\acute{e}}taux$, Switzerland). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two SFI implant-adapters were torqued with 35 Ncm into two implant analogues. Before the tube bars were finally sealed, the inner cavity of the tube bar was filled with liquid red dye to evaluate microleakage. As tube bar sealing agents three different materials were used (AGC Cem (AGC, resin based), Cervitec Plus (CP; varnish) and Gapseal (GS; silicone based). Four groups with eight specimens each were tested (GS, GS+AGC, AGC, CP). For cyclic loading, the attachment system was assembled parallel to the female counterparts in a chewing simulator. The mean retention forces of the initial and final ten cycles were statistically evaluated (ANOVA, ${\alpha}{\leq}.05$). RESULTS. All groups showed a significant loss of retention forces. Their means differed between 30-39 N initially and 22-28 N after 50,000 loading cycles. No significant statistical differences could be found between the groups at the beginning (P=.224), at the end (P=.257) or between the loss of retention forces (P=.288). Microleakage occurred initially only in some groups but after 10,000 loading cycles all groups exhibited microleakage. CONCLUSION. Long-term retention forces of the SFI-Bar remained above 20 N which can be considered clinically sufficient. The sealing agents in this study are not suitable to prevent microleakage.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제49권4호
• /
• pp.246-253
• /
• 2019

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of three different caries-preventing agents on artificial caries in a Streptococcus mutans-based caries model. Methods: Sixty-five caries-free human molar enamel blocks were treated with a demineralization solution and a remineralization solution. The specimens were assigned to the following groups according to the caries-protective product applied: group A, chlorhexidine varnish; group B, fluoride-releasing chemically cured sealant; group C, fluoride-releasing lightcured sealant; group D, positive control (specimens that were subjected to de- and remineralization cycles without treatment with any caries-protective agents); and group E, negative control (specimens that were not subjected to de- and remineralization cycles). Samples in groups A-D were stored in demineralization solution with S. mutans and thereafter in artificial saliva. This procedure was performed for 30 days. Average fluorescence loss (${\Delta}F$) and surface size of the lesions were measured using quantitative light-induced fluorescence at baseline and on the 7th, 14th, and 30th days. Results: After 30 days, group A demonstrated a significant increase in ΔF and the surface size of the lesions, no significant difference in comparison with the positive control group, and a significant difference in comparison with the negative control group. Group B showed no significant changes in both parameters at any of the measurement points. While group C showed increased ${\Delta}F$ after 14 days, no significant fluorescence change was observed after 30 days. Conclusions: Both fluoride-releasing sealants (chemically or light-cured) show anti-cariogenic effects, but the use of chlorhexidine varnish for the purpose of caries protection needs to be reconsidered.