不同表面处理方法对陶瓷托槽与不同瓷修复体粘结强度影响的研究

目的:评价不同瓷修复体试件经过3种表面处理方法后与陶瓷托槽粘结强度的关系。方法:钴铬烤瓷、铸瓷、锆瓷及聚合瓷4类试件经过喷砂(SB)、氢氟酸酸蚀(HFA)、喷砂+酸蚀(SB+HFA)处理后表面涂布硅烷偶联剂(SCA),再粘接陶瓷托槽,经37 ℃恒温水浴24 h 后检测粘接强度(SBS),扫描电镜观察托槽粘接前修复体表面的粗糙度及去除后修复体表面粘接剂残留情况。结果:钴铬烤瓷、铸瓷和聚合瓷试件的抗剪切强度分别与锆瓷试件比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);钴铬烤瓷和铸瓷试件的抗剪强度比较差异无统计学意义。扫描电镜结果显示4组试件表面粗糙度都有明显增加。而喷砂组和喷砂+酸蚀组试件表面的粗糙度明显高于酸蚀处理组;喷砂和喷砂+酸蚀组的表面处理效果差异不大,喷砂组的4类试件表面粘结剂残留最少。结论:3种表面处理方法均能满足临床正畸的需求。喷砂组去除托槽后对试件表面的影响最小,喷砂联合酸蚀处理并不能显著增加剪切强度。 关键词] 陶瓷托槽 剪切强度 瓷修复体 表面处理

Effect of Surface Treatment on Shear Bond Strength between Ceramic Bracket and Different Porcelains.

Objective: To evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) between ceramic brackets and different porcelains, the surfaces of which were treated with three different methods. Methods: The surfaces of four kinds of specimens, i.e. PFM, casting porcelain, zirconium porcelain and aggregation porcelain, were sandblasted (SB), etched by hydrofluoric acid (HFA), or treated by the combination of sandblast and HFA etching (SB+HFA). Then they were coated by silane coupling agent (SCA) and were bond with ceramic bracket. The specimens were incubated in 37 ℃ water bath for 24h before the shear bond strength test. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis was performed to observe surface roughness of the porcelains before bonding with the brackets and the adhesive residue and the damage extents on the surface after removal of brackets. Results: The shear bond strength of PFM, casting porcelain and aggregation porcelain were statistically different from zirconium porcelain (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the shear bond strength between PFM and casting porcelain. SEM showed the surface roughness and porosity were significantly increased after surface treatment compared with the untreated groups. The surface roughness of SB and SB+HFA groups was significantly higher than that of HFA group. No significant difference was found between SB and SB+HFA groups. The four kinds of porcelains treated with SB showed the least adhesive residue with the lowest adhesive residue index scored compared with other two treatments. Conclusion: Three kinds of surface treatment methods could satisfy the clinical needs of orthodontics. After the removal of ceramic bracket, the SB group showed the least adhesive residue on the surface of the porcelains. SB+HFA treatment did not increase the shear bond strength significantly.