ComparaciĆ³n de la resistencia adhesiva al microcizallamiento en restauraciones indirectas de disilicato de litio utilizando 2 agentes cementantes adhesivos
Cargando...
Archivos
Fecha
2017
Profesor/a GuĆa
Facultad/escuela
Idioma
es
TĆtulo de la revista
ISSN de la revista
TĆtulo del volumen
Editor
Universidad AndrƩs Bello
Nombre de Curso
Licencia CC
Licencia CC
Resumen
La obtenciĆ³n de una mayor y prolongada resistencia adhesiva en restauraciones indirectas de cerĆ”mica es un requisito para el Ć©xito clĆnico. Existe una amplia variedad de cementos dentales y es necesario comparar y estudiar sus propiedades.
Objetivo: Evaluar la resistencia adhesiva al microcizallamiento entre los cementos adhesivos Relyx Ultimate (RU) y CHOICETM 2 (CH) en restauraciones indirectas de porcelana feldespƔtica reforzada con disilicato de litio.
Materiales y mĆ©todo: Se trabajo sobre una muestra de 60 bloques de porcelana reforzada con disilicato de litio IPS e.max de 5mm3 , se incluyeron en bloques de acrĆlico y se dividieron en dos grupos; Grupo I: 30 bloques con cemento RU y Grupo II: 30 bloques con cemento CH. Se preparĆ³ cada cemento y luego fotopolimerizĆ³, segĆŗn indicaciones del fabricante. Se realizĆ³ un metodo de envejecimiento por 24 horas y, finalmente, la prueba de resistencia al microcizallamiento con la mĆ”quina Shear Bond Tester. Los resultados se tabularon en una planilla y los valores de resistencia adhesiva se analizaron estadĆsticamente con tĆ©cnicas no paramĆ©tricas (test estadĆsticos de prueba: U de Mann-Whitney). Resultados: el grupo de RU obtuvo un valor medio de 10,66 Ā± 4,18 MPa, mientras que el grupo de CH obtuvo un valor medio superior de 15,28 Ā± 4,70 MPa. El anĆ”lisis estadĆstico revela que existe diferencia significativa en la cementaciĆ³n con RU y CH (valor p<0.05).
Conclusiones: Existe una diferencia estadĆsticamente significativa entre los cementos utilizados, en donde el cemento CH presentĆ³ una resistencia adhesiva mayor que el cemento RU.
Obtaining a higher and longer adhesive strength in indirect ceramic restorations is a prerequisite for clinical success. There is a wide variety of dental cements and it is necessary to compare and study their properties. Aim: To evaluate the adhesive resistance to micro shear bond strength between Relyx Ultimate (UK) and CHOICETM 2 (CH) adhesive cements in indirect restorations of feldspathic porcelain reinforced with lithium disilicate. Materials and method: We worked on a sample of 60 blocks of porcelain reinforced with IPS e.max lithium disilicate of 5 mm3 , this were included in acrylic blocks and were divided into two groups; Group I: 30 blocks with RU cement and Group II: 30 blocks with CH cement. Each cement was prepared and then light-cured, according to the manufacturer's instructions. An aging method was carried out for 24 hours and, finally, the micro shear bond strength resistance test with the Shear Bond Tester machine. The results were tabulated in a spreadsheet and the values of adhesive strength were analyzed statistically with non-parametric techniques (test statistical tests: Mann-Whitney U). Results: the RU group obtained a mean value of 10.66 Ā± 4.18 MPa, while the CH group obtained a higher average value of 15.28 Ā± 4.70 MPa. The statistical analysis reveals that there is a significant difference in cementation with RU and CH (p value <0.05). Conclusions: There is a statistically significant difference between the cements used, where the CH cement had a higher adhesive strength than the RU cement.
Obtaining a higher and longer adhesive strength in indirect ceramic restorations is a prerequisite for clinical success. There is a wide variety of dental cements and it is necessary to compare and study their properties. Aim: To evaluate the adhesive resistance to micro shear bond strength between Relyx Ultimate (UK) and CHOICETM 2 (CH) adhesive cements in indirect restorations of feldspathic porcelain reinforced with lithium disilicate. Materials and method: We worked on a sample of 60 blocks of porcelain reinforced with IPS e.max lithium disilicate of 5 mm3 , this were included in acrylic blocks and were divided into two groups; Group I: 30 blocks with RU cement and Group II: 30 blocks with CH cement. Each cement was prepared and then light-cured, according to the manufacturer's instructions. An aging method was carried out for 24 hours and, finally, the micro shear bond strength resistance test with the Shear Bond Tester machine. The results were tabulated in a spreadsheet and the values of adhesive strength were analyzed statistically with non-parametric techniques (test statistical tests: Mann-Whitney U). Results: the RU group obtained a mean value of 10.66 Ā± 4.18 MPa, while the CH group obtained a higher average value of 15.28 Ā± 4.70 MPa. The statistical analysis reveals that there is a significant difference in cementation with RU and CH (p value <0.05). Conclusions: There is a statistically significant difference between the cements used, where the CH cement had a higher adhesive strength than the RU cement.
Notas
Tesis (Cirujano Dentista)
Palabras clave
Resinas Compuestas, Recubrimiento Dental Adhesivo, Adhesivos Dentales