牙髓治疗后牙齿的黏附策略:灌洗前的牙本质密封可增加冠状牙本质的长期微拉伸黏附强度。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Joana A Marques, Rui I Falacho, Gabriela Almeida, Francisco Caramelo, João Miguel Santos, João Rocha, Markus B Blatz, João Carlos Ramos, Paulo J Palma
{"title":"牙髓治疗后牙齿的黏附策略:灌洗前的牙本质密封可增加冠状牙本质的长期微拉伸黏附强度。","authors":"Joana A Marques, Rui I Falacho, Gabriela Almeida, Francisco Caramelo, João Miguel Santos, João Rocha, Markus B Blatz, João Carlos Ramos, Paulo J Palma","doi":"10.1111/jerd.13467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the long-term microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to coronal dentin using pre-endodontic dentin sealing (PEDS) and post-endodontic adhesion (PEA) techniques under various endodontic irrigation protocols.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Ten study groups (n = 10) were established based on the timing of adhesive application (PEDS versus PEA) and irrigation protocol: distilled water (control), 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA and 2% chlorhexidine, and a mixture of 3% NaOCl and 9% etidronic acid (HEDP). Specimens underwent μTBS testing after a six-month microspecimen aging period. Fracture patterns were analyzed, and adhesive interfaces were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis employed a mixed linear regression model with a 5% significance level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PEDS consistently preserved high bond strength across all irrigation protocols (57.4-59.5 MPa), while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigants resulted in significantly lower values (33.3-40.8 MPa; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed within the PEDS groups (p > 0.05). SEM analysis revealed consistent hybrid layers in PEDS and PEA/Control groups, while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigation solutions showed significant resin-dentin interface variations and interfacial gaps.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The PEDS technique preserved high and consistent μTBS regardless of the irrigation protocol, whereas endodontically irrigated PEA groups exhibited significantly reduced bond strength. PEDS offers a predictable approach to optimizing adhesive performance in endodontic-restorative treatments.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Integrating PEDS into routine endodontic-restorative workflow is recommended to enhance long-term bond strength to coronal dentin. The PEDS technique ensures consistent adhesive performance regardless of the endodontic irrigation protocol, enhancing restorative predictability and treatment success while preserving tooth structure.</p>","PeriodicalId":15988,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing Adhesive Strategies for Endodontically Treated Teeth-Part II: Dentin Sealing Before Irrigation Increases Long-Term Microtensile Bond Strength to Coronal Dentin.\",\"authors\":\"Joana A Marques, Rui I Falacho, Gabriela Almeida, Francisco Caramelo, João Miguel Santos, João Rocha, Markus B Blatz, João Carlos Ramos, Paulo J Palma\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jerd.13467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the long-term microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to coronal dentin using pre-endodontic dentin sealing (PEDS) and post-endodontic adhesion (PEA) techniques under various endodontic irrigation protocols.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Ten study groups (n = 10) were established based on the timing of adhesive application (PEDS versus PEA) and irrigation protocol: distilled water (control), 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA and 2% chlorhexidine, and a mixture of 3% NaOCl and 9% etidronic acid (HEDP). Specimens underwent μTBS testing after a six-month microspecimen aging period. Fracture patterns were analyzed, and adhesive interfaces were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis employed a mixed linear regression model with a 5% significance level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PEDS consistently preserved high bond strength across all irrigation protocols (57.4-59.5 MPa), while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigants resulted in significantly lower values (33.3-40.8 MPa; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed within the PEDS groups (p > 0.05). SEM analysis revealed consistent hybrid layers in PEDS and PEA/Control groups, while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigation solutions showed significant resin-dentin interface variations and interfacial gaps.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The PEDS technique preserved high and consistent μTBS regardless of the irrigation protocol, whereas endodontically irrigated PEA groups exhibited significantly reduced bond strength. PEDS offers a predictable approach to optimizing adhesive performance in endodontic-restorative treatments.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Integrating PEDS into routine endodontic-restorative workflow is recommended to enhance long-term bond strength to coronal dentin. The PEDS technique ensures consistent adhesive performance regardless of the endodontic irrigation protocol, enhancing restorative predictability and treatment success while preserving tooth structure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15988,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13467\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13467","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较不同根管灌洗方案下牙本质密封(PEDS)和牙本质粘附(PEA)技术与冠状牙本质的长期微拉伸结合强度(μTBS)。材料和方法:根据粘接时间(PEDS与PEA)和灌洗方案,建立10个研究组(n = 10):蒸馏水(对照)、3%次氯酸钠(NaOCl)、3% NaOCl加17%乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)、3% NaOCl加17% EDTA和2%氯己定、3% NaOCl加9%地替膦酸(HEDP)的混合物。微标本老化6个月后进行μTBS测试。分析了断裂模式,并用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)对粘附界面进行了评估。统计分析采用混合线性回归模型,显著性水平为5%。结果:在所有灌洗方案中,PEDS始终保持较高的结合强度(57.4-59.5 MPa),而使用根管灌洗剂处理的PEA组的结合强度显著降低(33.3-40.8 MPa;p 0.05)。扫描电镜分析显示,PEDS组和PEA/Control组具有一致的杂交层,而经根管灌洗液处理的PEA组树脂-牙本质界面出现明显变化和界面间隙。结论:无论灌洗方式如何,PEDS技术均能保持较高且一致的μTBS,而根管内灌洗PEA组的结合强度明显降低。PEDS提供了一种可预测的方法来优化牙髓修复治疗中的粘接剂性能。临床意义:建议将PEDS纳入常规的牙髓修复工作流程,以增强与冠状牙本质的长期结合强度。无论根管灌洗方案如何,PEDS技术都能确保一致的粘接性能,在保留牙齿结构的同时提高修复的可预测性和治疗的成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Advancing Adhesive Strategies for Endodontically Treated Teeth-Part II: Dentin Sealing Before Irrigation Increases Long-Term Microtensile Bond Strength to Coronal Dentin.

Objective: To compare the long-term microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to coronal dentin using pre-endodontic dentin sealing (PEDS) and post-endodontic adhesion (PEA) techniques under various endodontic irrigation protocols.

Materials and methods: Ten study groups (n = 10) were established based on the timing of adhesive application (PEDS versus PEA) and irrigation protocol: distilled water (control), 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), 3% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA and 2% chlorhexidine, and a mixture of 3% NaOCl and 9% etidronic acid (HEDP). Specimens underwent μTBS testing after a six-month microspecimen aging period. Fracture patterns were analyzed, and adhesive interfaces were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis employed a mixed linear regression model with a 5% significance level.

Results: PEDS consistently preserved high bond strength across all irrigation protocols (57.4-59.5 MPa), while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigants resulted in significantly lower values (33.3-40.8 MPa; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed within the PEDS groups (p > 0.05). SEM analysis revealed consistent hybrid layers in PEDS and PEA/Control groups, while PEA groups treated with endodontic irrigation solutions showed significant resin-dentin interface variations and interfacial gaps.

Conclusions: The PEDS technique preserved high and consistent μTBS regardless of the irrigation protocol, whereas endodontically irrigated PEA groups exhibited significantly reduced bond strength. PEDS offers a predictable approach to optimizing adhesive performance in endodontic-restorative treatments.

Clinical significance: Integrating PEDS into routine endodontic-restorative workflow is recommended to enhance long-term bond strength to coronal dentin. The PEDS technique ensures consistent adhesive performance regardless of the endodontic irrigation protocol, enhancing restorative predictability and treatment success while preserving tooth structure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
124
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) is the longest standing peer-reviewed journal devoted solely to advancing the knowledge and practice of esthetic dentistry. Its goal is to provide the very latest evidence-based information in the realm of contemporary interdisciplinary esthetic dentistry through high quality clinical papers, sound research reports and educational features. The range of topics covered in the journal includes: - Interdisciplinary esthetic concepts - Implants - Conservative adhesive restorations - Tooth Whitening - Prosthodontic materials and techniques - Dental materials - Orthodontic, periodontal and endodontic esthetics - Esthetics related research - Innovations in esthetics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信