Loading...
Publication
Benefício da aplicação de um primer e da sua co-polimerização com resinas compostas auto-adesivas aplicadas em dentina
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.7 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Objetivos: Comparar a resistência adesiva à microtração, de duas resinas comerciais flowable auto-adesivas, variando o pré-tratamento de superfície, na dentina.
Materiais e Métodos: Foram utilizados 66 molares humanos definitivos, hígidos, de forma a expor a dentina coronária, utilizando um micrótomo. Foram divididos aleatoriamente por 2 resinas auto-adesivas comerciais, Constic (DMG, Alemanha) e VertiseTMFlow (Kerr, EUA), uma convencional Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE, EUA) e por
pré-tratamentos, originando 6 grupos: VF_EtchOnly; VF_Primer; VF_OptiBondFL; Constic_EtchOnly; Constic_Primer; Constic_OptiBondFL. Os tratamentos consistiram no condicionamento ácido, aplicação exclusiva de um primer (OptiBond FL, Kerr, EUA) com polimerização em modo co-curing, ou utilização do adesivo completo. Sobre a dentina foi realizado o procedimento restaurador, cumprindo as instruções do fabricante.
Após 24 h em água destilada (37ºC), os dentes foram seccionados em palitos (1±0,2 mm2) e posteriormente testados num ensaio de microtração (0,5 mm/min; 5 kN célula, Shimadzu AGS-X, Japão). A estatística inferencial contemplou ANOVA two-way e Tukey’s HSD post-hoc (a=0.05).
Resultados: A ANOVA two-way confirmou que a resina auto-adesiva utilizada (p<0,018) e o tratamento de superfície (p<0,001), afetaram a resistência adesiva. Os grupos EtchOnly registaram as menores resistências adesivas, cerca de três vezes menores que os grupos de primer. Os grupos do Optibond FL revelaram as mais altas. O grupo VF_EtchOnly apresentou diferenças significativas dos grupos VF_Primer (p<0,001),
Constic_Primer (p=0,003) e Optibond FL (p<0,001). O Constic_EtchOnly também foi diferente de todos os outros grupos (p<0,001), excepto do VF_EtchOnly (p=0,99). Os grupos CoCuring não foram diferentes entre si (p=0,13), nem os Optibond FL.
Conclusões: A utilização exclusiva de um primer em modo co-curing, apresentou um desempenho superior quando comparado com o condicionamento ácido isoladamente.
Estes resultados sugerem que o fraco desempenho destes compósitos se deve à sua viscosidade que leva a fraca infiltração, colmatada com o primer.
Aim: To compare the microtensile bond strength on dentin of two commercial flowable self-adhesive composites, upon variation of the surface pre-treatment. Material & Methods: Sixty-six definitive, healthy human molars were used to expose the coronal dentin using a microtome. They were randomly divided by 2 commercial selfadhesive resins, Constic (DMG, Germany) and VertiseTMFlow (Kerr, USA), a conventional Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE, USA) and 3 pre-treatments, originating 6 groups: VF_EtchOnly; VF_Primer; VF_OptiBondFL; Constic_EtchOnly; Constic_Primer; Constic_OptiBondFL. The treatments consisted in acid etching, exclusive application of a primer (OptiBond FL, USA) with polymerization in co-curing mode, or use of the complete adhesive. On the dentin the restorative procedure was performed, following the manufacturer's instructions. After 24 h in distilled water (37°C), the teeth were sectioned into bonded beams (1±0.2 mm2) and subsequently tested in a microtensile test setup (0.5 mm/min; 5 kN cell, Shimadzu AGS-X, Japan). Inferential statistics included two-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post-hoc (a=0.05). Results: The two-way ANOVA confirmed that the self-adhesive resin used (p<0.018) and the surface treatment (p<0.001), affected the adhesive strength. The EtchOnly groups recorded the lowest adhesive strengths, about three times lower than the Primer groups. The OptibondFL groups showed the highest ones. The VF_EtchOnly group showed significant differences from the VF_Primer (p<0.001), Constic_Primer (p=0.003) and OptiBond FL (p<0.001) groups. Constic_EtchOnly was also different from all other groups (p<0.001), except from VF_EtchOnly (p=0.99). The CoCuring groups were not different from each other (p=0.13), nor were the OptiBond FL. Conclusions: The use of a primer alone in co-curing mode, showed superior performance when compared to etching alone. These results suggest that the poor performance of these composites is due to their limited infiltration potentiated by their viscosity, a problem solved with the use of primer.
Aim: To compare the microtensile bond strength on dentin of two commercial flowable self-adhesive composites, upon variation of the surface pre-treatment. Material & Methods: Sixty-six definitive, healthy human molars were used to expose the coronal dentin using a microtome. They were randomly divided by 2 commercial selfadhesive resins, Constic (DMG, Germany) and VertiseTMFlow (Kerr, USA), a conventional Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE, USA) and 3 pre-treatments, originating 6 groups: VF_EtchOnly; VF_Primer; VF_OptiBondFL; Constic_EtchOnly; Constic_Primer; Constic_OptiBondFL. The treatments consisted in acid etching, exclusive application of a primer (OptiBond FL, USA) with polymerization in co-curing mode, or use of the complete adhesive. On the dentin the restorative procedure was performed, following the manufacturer's instructions. After 24 h in distilled water (37°C), the teeth were sectioned into bonded beams (1±0.2 mm2) and subsequently tested in a microtensile test setup (0.5 mm/min; 5 kN cell, Shimadzu AGS-X, Japan). Inferential statistics included two-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post-hoc (a=0.05). Results: The two-way ANOVA confirmed that the self-adhesive resin used (p<0.018) and the surface treatment (p<0.001), affected the adhesive strength. The EtchOnly groups recorded the lowest adhesive strengths, about three times lower than the Primer groups. The OptibondFL groups showed the highest ones. The VF_EtchOnly group showed significant differences from the VF_Primer (p<0.001), Constic_Primer (p=0.003) and OptiBond FL (p<0.001) groups. Constic_EtchOnly was also different from all other groups (p<0.001), except from VF_EtchOnly (p=0.99). The CoCuring groups were not different from each other (p=0.13), nor were the OptiBond FL. Conclusions: The use of a primer alone in co-curing mode, showed superior performance when compared to etching alone. These results suggest that the poor performance of these composites is due to their limited infiltration potentiated by their viscosity, a problem solved with the use of primer.
Description
Dissertação para obtenção do grau de Mestre no Instituto Universitário Egas Moniz
Keywords
Adesão Resinas compostas auto-adesivas Resistência adesiva Microscopia ótica