摘要
目的:对比研究4种粘接剂抗压强度及挠曲强度的差异。方法:选用树脂粘接剂Compolute,复合树脂Resinomer,树脂加强型玻璃离子Vitremer Luting及传统玻璃离子Ketac Cem 4种粘接剂,分别制作抗压强度及挠曲强度的标准试件,每组10个。万能试验机测试其抗压强度及挠曲强度值,采用单因素方差分析及组间两两比较的LSD-t检验进行统计分析。结果:抗压强度组:Compolute为245.73±23.17MPa,Resinomer为153.50±18.59MPa,Vitremer Luting为61.89±10.92MPa,Ketac Cem为163.78±17.07 MPa。Ketac Cem和Resinomer组,其余各组组间两两比较差异均有统计学意义,P<0.05。抗压强度由高到低的顺序为Compolute>Ketac Cem>Resinomer>Vitremer Luting;挠曲强度组:Compolute为79.40±15.02MPa,Resinomer为102.18±19.61MPa,Vitremer Luting为20.70±3.89MPa,Ketac Cem为21.04±4.02MPa。除后两组外,其余各组两两比较差异均有统计学意义,P<0.05。挠曲强度由高到低的顺序为Resinomer>Compolute>Ketac Cem>Vitremer Luting。结论:与Vitremer Luting及Ketac Cem相比,Compolute表现较高的抗压强度及挠曲强度,Resinomer则具有较高的挠曲强度及较低的抗压强度,临床上可根据不同修复需求选择合适的粘接系统。
Objective：The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the compressive and flexural strengths of four cement systems.Methods：Resin cement （Compolute）,composite resin （Resinomer）,resin-modified glass ionomer cement （Vitremer Luting） and glass ionomer cement （Ketac Cem） were chosen and the standard specimens of above adhesives for the compressive strength and flexural strength tests were made with 10 in each group.Universal material testing machine was applied to detect these two measurements.Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and LSD-t test.Results：For the compressive strength group,the measurements of Compolute,Resinomer,Vitremer Lutingand Ketac Cem were 245.73±23.17MPa,153.50± 18.59MPa,61.89± 10.92MPa,163.78± 17.07MPa,respectively.There were significantly different between any two groups （P〈0.05）,except for Ketac Cem and Resinomer cements.And the value ranged fiom high to low was Compolute〉Ketac Cem〉Resinomer〉Vitremer Luting.For the flexural strength group,Compolute was 79.40± 15.02MPa,Resinomer was 102.18± 19.61 MPa,Vitremer Luting was 20.70± 3.89MPa,and Ketac Cem was 21.04± 4.02MPa.The pairwise comparison was significantly different,except for the last two groups.The range from high to low was Resinomer〉Compolute〉Ketac Cem〉Vitremer Luting.Conclusion：Compared with Vitremer Luting and Ketac Cem,Compolute cement expressed more excellent compressive and flexural strengths than the other cements.Resinomer cement exhibited highest flexural strength but lower compressive strength.Different kinds of resin cement systems can be chosen according to their special excellent properties in clinical application.
出处
《口腔颌面修复学杂志》
2013年第5期298-301,共4页
Chinese Journal of Prosthodontics
关键词
粘接剂
抗压强度
挠曲强度
resin cement
compressive strength
flexural strength
