光照射模式对双重固化树脂水门汀显微硬度的影响

上海口腔医学 ›› 2013, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (5): 514-517.

光照射模式对双重固化树脂水门汀显微硬度的影响

许晓冬，孟翔峰，聂蓉蓉

(南京大学医学院附属口腔医院?南京市口腔医院修复科，江苏南京 210008)

收稿日期:2013-03-08 修回日期:2013-04-22 出版日期:2013-10-10 发布日期:2013-10-10
通讯作者: 孟翔峰，Tel：025-83620297，E-mail: mengsoar@nju.edu.cn
作者简介:许晓冬(1982-)，女，医师，在读硕士研究生，E-mail: yyxxd1123@163.com
基金资助:
南京市医学科技发展基金资助项目(ZKX09035)；南京市科技发展基金资助项目(201001083)；南京市医学科技发展基金资助项目(YKK10125)

Influence of light irradiation mode on microhardness of dual cured resin cements

XU Xiao-dong, MENG Xiang-feng, NIE Rong-rong

Department of Prosthodontics, Institute and Hospital of Stomatology, Nanjing University Medical School. Nanjing 210008, Jiangsu Province, China

Received:2013-03-08 Revised:2013-04-22 Online:2013-10-10 Published:2013-10-10
Supported by:
Supported by Nanjing Medical Science and Technology Development Fund (ZKX09035), Nanjing Science and Technology Development Fund (201001083) and Nanjing Medical Science and Technology Development Fund (YKK10125).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：评价光照射模式对双重固化树脂水门汀显微硬度的影响。方法：将5种双重固化自黏结树脂水门汀Biscem、Clearfil SA Cement、G-CEM LinkAce、Maxcem Elite、RelyX U100和2种双重固化常规型树脂水门汀DUOLINK和Nexus 3注满有机玻璃圈(内径7.5 mm，高1 mm)，分别接受持续照射(20 s)和延迟照射(5 s照射+60 s延迟+20 s照射)后，置于37℃下避光干燥储存。每组试件(n=5)光照射后0.5 h、1 d和4周，分别接受努氏显微硬度测量，然后将光照射后4周的所有试件浸泡在无水乙醇中24 h，再次测量硬度值，并计算试件浸泡前、后的硬度值降低百分比。采用SPSS 16.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果：2种照射模式下，7组材料硬度值的增长主要发生在照射后24 h。除Biscem外，照射模式未对其余6种材料照射后4周的硬度值产生显著影响(P>0.05)；但在软化实验条件下，持续照射模式下的5种自黏结树脂水门汀硬度值降低百分比显著高于延迟照射模式下相应的硬度值降低百分比(P<0.05)，而2种常规型树脂水门汀的硬度降低百分比未受到照射模式的影响(P>0.05)。结论：自黏结树脂水门汀在延迟照射模式下能够获得更好的抗软化能力。

关键词: 照射模式, 树脂水门汀, 硬度, 无水乙醇软化

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of different light irradiation modes on microhardness of dual-curing resin cements. METHODS: The cylindrical specimens (1 mm in thickness and 7.5 mm in diameter) of 5 self-adhesive resin cements (Biscem, Clearfil SA Cement, G-CEM LinkAce, Maxcem Elite and RelyX U100) and 2 universal resin cements(DUOLINK and Nexus 3) were irradiated respectively by a continuous mode (light-curing for 20 s) and a delayed mode (light-curing 5 s + auto-curing 60 s + light-curing 20 s), and then they were placed dry in a light-proof thermostat at 37℃. Surface microhardness of specimen was detected at 0.5, 24 h and 4 weeks post-irradiation. After that period of time, all specimens were soaked in ethanol for 24 h, their hardness were detected again, and the percentage of hardness reduction after soaking were calculated. Data were analyzed by SPSS 16.0 software package. RESULTS: The hardness of all resin cements under both irradiation modes increased mainly within 24 h post-irradiation. The irradiation mode did not affect the hardness of all resin cements 4 weeks after irradiation significantly (P>0.05), except for Biscem. However, after ethanol softening, 5 self-adhesive resin cements cured by the continuous mode had higher hardness reduction percentage than that cured by delayed mode (P<0.05); while hardness reduction percentage of 2 universal resin cements had no significant difference between continuous and delayed cure modes (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The self-adhesive resin cements cured by delayed mode had better anti-softening ability.

Key words: Irradiation mode, Resin cement, Hardness, Ethanol softening

中图分类号:

R783.1

许晓冬, 孟翔峰, 聂蓉蓉. 光照射模式对双重固化树脂水门汀显微硬度的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2013, 22(5): 514-517.

XU Xiao-dong, MENG Xiang-feng, NIE Rong-rong. Influence of light irradiation mode on microhardness of dual cured resin cements[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2013, 22(5): 514-517.

参考文献

[1] Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Influence of pulse-delay curing on softening of polymer structures[J]. J Dent Res, 2001, 80(6): 1570-1573.
[2] Soh MS, Yap AU. Influence of curing modes on crosslink density in polymer structures[J]. J Dent, 2004, 32(4): 321-326.
[3] Benetti AR, Asmussen E, Munksgaard EC, et al. Softening and elution of monomers in ethanol[J]. Dent Mater, 2009, 25(8): 1007-1013.
[4] Rueggeberg FA, Craig RG. Correlation of parameters used to estimate monomer conversion in a light-cured composite[J]. J Dent Res, 1988, 67(6): 932-937.
[5] Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Two-step curing: influence on conversion and softening of a dental polymer[J]. Dent Mater, 2003, 19(6): 466-470.
[6] Meng X, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Hardness development of dual-cured resin cements through different thicknesses of ceramics[J]. Dent Mater J, 2006, 25(1): 132-137.
[7] Leung RL, Fan PL, Johnston WM. Post-irradiation polymerization of visible light-activated composite resin[J]. J Dent Res,1983,62(3): 363-365.
[8] Suh BI, Feng L, Pashley DH, et al. Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and chemically-cured or dual-cured composites. Part Ⅲ. Effect of acidic resin monomers[J]. J Adhes Dent, 2003, 5(4): 267-282.
[9] Adusei G, Deb S, Nicholson JW, et al. Polymerization behavior of an organophorus monomer for use in dental restorative materials[J]. J Appl Polym Sci, 2003, 88(2): 565-569.
[10] El-Mowafy OM, Rubo MH. Influence of composite inlay/onlay thickness on hardening of dual-cured resin cements[J]. J Can Dent Assoc, 2000, 66(3): 147.
[11] Feng L, Suh BI. The effect of curing modes on polymerization contraction stress of a dual cured composite[J]. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2006, 76(1): 196-202.
[12] Lee IB, Um CM. Thermal analysis on the cure speed of dual cured resin cements under porcelain inlays[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2001, 28(2): 186-197.