Clinical trial of collapsed repair andin vitro tensile strength test
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.34.005
- VernacularTitle:崩瓷修补的临床试验及体外材料学拉伸强度实验
- Author:
Xing WANG
;
Lu QI
;
Zhenyu GU
;
Huiyu HE
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Dental Porcelain;
Composite Resins;
Shear Strength
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2015;(34):5433-5437
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:Currently, there are many studies on colapsed repair, but a systematic and horizontal comparison is not reported yet. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of conventional resin adhesive, resin adhesive+silane coupling agent and adjacent surface open part of the crown on colapsed repair through clinical trial and in vitro experiment. METHODS: (1) Clinical trial: 90 patients with porcelain colapse were randomized into three groups, and respectively treated with conventional resin adhesive, resin adhesive+silane coupling agent and adjacent surface open part of the crown. Success rate was measured and compared among three groups at 1 year after repair. (2) In vitro test: Twenty test specimens were equaly divided into two groups, and treated with conventional resin adhesive and resin adhesive+silane coupling agent, respectively. Then, shear strength was detected in the two groups. Twenty double-crown specimens were equaly divided into four groups. The first three groups were treated with sand blasting, silane coupling agent and their combination treatment, respectively; the rest group had no treatment (control group). After repair, the tensile strength of each specimen was detected.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:The success rate of colapsed repair was 37% for conventional resin adhesive, 90% for resin adhesive+silane coupling agent and 100% for adjacent surface open part of the crown. The shear strength was (13.978±0.343) MPa for the conventional resin adhesive and (10.058±0.64) MPa for resin adhesive+silane coupling agent, and there was a significant difference between two methods (P < 0.01). The tensile strength was (0.68±0.04) kN in the control group, (1.00±0.02) kN in the sand blasting group, (1.31±0.08) kN in silane coupling agent group, and (1.09±0.04) kN in the combination group, and there was a significant differences between groups (P < 0.01). Experimental results show that the silane coupling agent+resin adhesive treatment and adjacent surface open part of the crown are superior to conventional resin adhesive.
