Neslihan Tekce, Mustafa Demirci, Sultan Aslıhan Gokturk, Safa Tuncer, Emre Ozel, Kansad Pala, Canan Baydemir
{"title":"粘接和表面密封剂应用对术后后部复合材料敏感性的影响。","authors":"Neslihan Tekce, Mustafa Demirci, Sultan Aslıhan Gokturk, Safa Tuncer, Emre Ozel, Kansad Pala, Canan Baydemir","doi":"10.17096/jiufd.33921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study was to evaluate the postoperative sensitivity of posterior Class I composite restoration at short-term, restorated with two different all-in-one self-etch adhesives with or without surface sealant application.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>44 restorations were inserted in 11 patients who required Class I restorations in their molars. Each patient received 4 restorations, thus four groups were formed; (1) G-Aenial Bond (GC, Japan); (2) Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray, Japan); (3) G-Aenial Bond+Fortify Plus (Bisco, USA), (4) Clearfil S3 Bond+Fortify Plus. Sensitivity was evaluated at 24h, 7, 15, and 30 days using cold air, ice, and pressure stimuli using a visual analog scale. Comparisons of continuous variables between the sensitivity evaluations were performed using the Friedman's One-Way Analysis of Variance with repeated measures test (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The type of adhesive used and the application of a surface sealant had no significant effects in postoperative sensitivity (p>0.05). The use of Clearfil S3 Bond resulted in almost the same level of postoperative sensitivity as did the use of G-Aenial Bond. The highest sensitivity scores were observed for the surface sealant applied teeth without any statistical significance (p>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Self etch adhesives displayed postoperative sensitivity. The sensitivity scores slightly decreased at the end of 30 days (p>0.05). Surface sealant application did not result in a decrease in sensitivity scores for either dentin adhesives.</p>","PeriodicalId":30947,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","volume":"49 3","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3d/04/jiufd-049-001-c.PMC5573498.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of bonding and surface sealant application on postoperative sensitivity from posterior composites.\",\"authors\":\"Neslihan Tekce, Mustafa Demirci, Sultan Aslıhan Gokturk, Safa Tuncer, Emre Ozel, Kansad Pala, Canan Baydemir\",\"doi\":\"10.17096/jiufd.33921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study was to evaluate the postoperative sensitivity of posterior Class I composite restoration at short-term, restorated with two different all-in-one self-etch adhesives with or without surface sealant application.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>44 restorations were inserted in 11 patients who required Class I restorations in their molars. Each patient received 4 restorations, thus four groups were formed; (1) G-Aenial Bond (GC, Japan); (2) Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray, Japan); (3) G-Aenial Bond+Fortify Plus (Bisco, USA), (4) Clearfil S3 Bond+Fortify Plus. Sensitivity was evaluated at 24h, 7, 15, and 30 days using cold air, ice, and pressure stimuli using a visual analog scale. Comparisons of continuous variables between the sensitivity evaluations were performed using the Friedman's One-Way Analysis of Variance with repeated measures test (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The type of adhesive used and the application of a surface sealant had no significant effects in postoperative sensitivity (p>0.05). The use of Clearfil S3 Bond resulted in almost the same level of postoperative sensitivity as did the use of G-Aenial Bond. The highest sensitivity scores were observed for the surface sealant applied teeth without any statistical significance (p>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Self etch adhesives displayed postoperative sensitivity. The sensitivity scores slightly decreased at the end of 30 days (p>0.05). Surface sealant application did not result in a decrease in sensitivity scores for either dentin adhesives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":30947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"49 3\",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3d/04/jiufd-049-001-c.PMC5573498.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17096/jiufd.33921\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17096/jiufd.33921","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
目的:本研究的目的是评估两种不同的一体化自蚀刻胶粘剂(有或没有表面密封剂)修复后短期I类复合修复体的术后敏感性。材料和方法:对11例需要ⅰ类修复体的患者进行了44个修复体的植入。每例患者行4个修复体,分为4组;(1) g - enial Bond(日本GC);(2) Clearfil S3 Bond(日本库拉雷);(3) g - enial Bond+Fortify Plus (Bisco, USA); (4) Clearfil S3 Bond+Fortify Plus。在24小时、7天、15天和30天,使用视觉模拟量表对冷空气、冰和压力刺激进行敏感性评估。使用重复测量检验的Friedman's单向方差分析对敏感性评估之间的连续变量进行比较(结果:使用的胶粘剂类型和表面密封剂的应用对术后敏感性没有显著影响(p>0.05)。使用Clearfil S3 Bond与使用g - enial Bond的术后敏感性几乎相同。牙面封闭剂的敏感性评分最高,但差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。结论:自蚀刻粘接剂具有良好的术后敏感性。30 d时敏感性评分略有下降(p>0.05)。表面密封剂的应用并没有导致两种牙本质粘接剂敏感性评分的降低。
The effect of bonding and surface sealant application on postoperative sensitivity from posterior composites.
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the postoperative sensitivity of posterior Class I composite restoration at short-term, restorated with two different all-in-one self-etch adhesives with or without surface sealant application.
Materials and methods: 44 restorations were inserted in 11 patients who required Class I restorations in their molars. Each patient received 4 restorations, thus four groups were formed; (1) G-Aenial Bond (GC, Japan); (2) Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray, Japan); (3) G-Aenial Bond+Fortify Plus (Bisco, USA), (4) Clearfil S3 Bond+Fortify Plus. Sensitivity was evaluated at 24h, 7, 15, and 30 days using cold air, ice, and pressure stimuli using a visual analog scale. Comparisons of continuous variables between the sensitivity evaluations were performed using the Friedman's One-Way Analysis of Variance with repeated measures test (p<0.05).
Results: The type of adhesive used and the application of a surface sealant had no significant effects in postoperative sensitivity (p>0.05). The use of Clearfil S3 Bond resulted in almost the same level of postoperative sensitivity as did the use of G-Aenial Bond. The highest sensitivity scores were observed for the surface sealant applied teeth without any statistical significance (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Self etch adhesives displayed postoperative sensitivity. The sensitivity scores slightly decreased at the end of 30 days (p>0.05). Surface sealant application did not result in a decrease in sensitivity scores for either dentin adhesives.