4.6 Article

Micromorphology of the Adhesive Interface of Self-Adhesive Resin Cements to Enamel and Dentin

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14030492

关键词

dental bonding; scanning electron microscopy; self-adhesive resin cements; SEM evaluation

资金

  1. Medical Faculty of the University of Regensburg (ReForM A program)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interfaces between dentin, enamel, and luting agents were characterized using low vacuum SEM, showing that different luting agents had varying effects on the micromorphology of adhesive interfaces under different curing modes.
Interfaces between dentin, enamel and luting agents were characterized using low vacuum Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). After smear layer creation, one of three luting agents (RelyX Unicem 2, Clearfil SA Cement and Panavia F 2.0/ED Primer II) was applied on 60 enamel-dentin specimens and dual-cured or self-cured. Specimens were polished (Experiment 1) and subsequently demineralized and deproteinized (Experiment 2). Adhesive interfaces were analyzed (low vacuum SEM, x3000). Presence of an interdiffusion zone, tag-like structures (dentin) and marginal gaps (enamel) were assessed. Non-parametrical tests (chi(2)-test, alpha = 0.05) were performed. The first null-hypothesis was that the adhesive interface micromorphology between enamel and dentin and self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) is similar with conventional resin cement used with a self-etch adhesive (CRC+SE). The second null-hypothesis was that the micromorphology is not influenced by curing modes. Interdiffusion zones and tag-like structures (dentin) were observed more frequently for CRC+SE compared to SARCs. For each luting agent, there was a non-significant (p > 0.05) tendency for interdiffusion zone and tag-like structures detectable in more specimens after self-curing compared to dual-curing. Marginal gaps (enamel) were found only for SARCs. The first null-hypothesis was not rejected fully: Tag-like structures and interdiffusion zones in dentin were found for CRC+SE and SARCs. The second null-hypothesis was not rejected.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据