Micro-tensile Bond Strength of Composite Resin Bonded to Er:YAG Laser-prepared Dentin

Er:YAG 레이저로 삭제된 상아질에 대한 컴포지트 레진의 미세인장결합강도에 관한 연구

  • Min, Suk-Jin (Department of Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Ahn, Yong-Woo (Department of Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Ko, Myung-Yun (Department of Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Park, June-Sang (Department of Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 민숙진 (부산대학교 치과대학 구강내과학교실) ;
  • 안용우 (부산대학교 치과대학 구강내과학교실) ;
  • 고명연 (부산대학교 치과대학 구강내과학교실) ;
  • 박준상 (부산대학교 치과대학 구강내과학교실)
  • Published : 2006.09.30

Abstract

Purpose The aims of this study were to evaluate micro-tensile bond strength of composite resin bonded to dentin following high-speed rotary handpiece preparation or Er:YAG laser preparation with two different adhesive systems and to assess the influence of different Er:YAG laser energies on the micro-tensile bond strength. Materials and Methods In this study, 40 third morlars were used. Flat dentin specimans were obtained and randomly assigned to eight groups. Dentin surfaces were prepared with one of four cutting types: carbide bur, Er:YAG laser (2 W, 3 W and 4 W) and conditioned with two bonding systems, Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus (SM), Clearfil SE bond (SE) and composite resin-build ups were created. After storage for 24 hours, each specimen was serially sectioned perpendicular to the bonded surface to produce more than thirty slabs in each group. Micro-tensile bond strength test was performed at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Micro-tensile bond strengths (${\mu}TBS$) were expressed as means$\pm$SD. Data were submitted to statistical analysis using two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, Student-Newman-Keuls' multiple comparison test and t-test. Results and Conclusion 1. Regardless of bonding systems, the ${\mu}TBS$ according to cutting types were from highest to lowest : 3 W, 2 W, Bur, and 4 W. In addition, there was no significant difference between Bur and 4 W (p<0.001). 2. Regardless of cutting types, SM showed significantly higher ${\mu}TBS$ than SE (p<0.001). 3. Bonding to dentin conditioned with SM resulted in higher ${\mu}TBS$ for 3 W compared to Bur, 2 W, and 4 W. There was no significant difference between 2 W and Bur (p<0.001). 4. Bonding to dentin conditioned with SE resulted in higher ${\mu}TBS$ for 3 W compared to 2 W, 4 W, and Bur. Bur exhibited significant lower ${\mu}TBS$ than all other cutting types. There were no significant differences between 3 W, 2 W and between 4 W and Bur (p<0.001). 5. The ${\mu}TBS$ of laser cutting groups were shown in order from highest to lowest: 3 W, 2 W and 4 W in two bonding systems. There was no significant difference between 2 W and 3 W in SE (p<0.001). : The ${\mu}TBS$ of composite resin bonded dentin was significantly affected by interaction between the cutting type and bonding system. In the range of 2 W-3 W, cavity preparation of the Er:YAG laser seems to supply good adhesion of composite resin restoration no less than bur preparation. In particular, if you want to use the self-etching system, including Clearfil SE bond for the purpose of a simplification of the bonding procedures and prevention of adverse effects by excessive etching, an Er:YAG laser may offer better adhesion than a bur.

목적 전통적 고속 회전식 절삭기구 또는 Er:YAG 레이저로 삭제된 상아질에, 두가지 다른 접착 시스템을 적용한 후, 축조한 컴포지트 레진의 미세인장결합강도를 비교하고, 다양한 Er:YAG 레이저 에너지가 미세인장결합강도에 미치는 영향을 평가한다. 재료 및 방법 40개의 제3대구치를 사용하여, 평평한 상아질면을 만든 후 8개의 군으로 나누어, 4가지 절삭방법 (고속 회전식 절삭기구, 2 W, 3 W, 4 W 출력의 Er:YAG 레이저) 중 한 가지로 삭제하고, 2가지 접착 시스템 (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus, Clearfil SE bond) 중 한 가지로 처리하여 컴포지트 레진을 축조하였다. 24시간의 저장 후, 각 시편을 결합면에 수직으로 자르고, 미세인장결합강도를 측정하였다. 각 군의 미세인장결합강도는 평균$\pm$표준 편차로 표현하였고, 통계분석을 위해 two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, student-Newman-Keuls' multiple comparison test, 그리고 t-test가 사용되었다. 결과 및 결론 1. 접착시스템과 관계없이, 절삭방법에 따른 미세인장결합강도의 유의한 차이가 있었고, 높은 순서대로 나열하면 다음과 같다: 3 W, 2 W, Bur, 4 W (p<0.001). 2. 절삭방법과 관계없이, Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus로 처리한 군이 Clearfil SE bond로 처리한 군보다 유의하게 높은 미세인장결합강도를 나타냈다 (p<0.001). 3. Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus로 처리한 군 중에서, 3 W 레이저 절삭군이 가장 높은 미세인장결합강도를 나타냈고, 다음이 Bur, 2 W, 4 W 절삭군 순이었다 (p<0.001). 4. Clearfil SE bond로 처리한 군 중에서 3 W 레이저 절삭군이 가장 높은 미세인장결합강도를 나타냈고, 다음이 2 W, 4 W, Bur 절삭군 순이었다 (p<0.001). 5. 두 가지 접착 시스템 모두에서, 레이저로 절삭한 군의 미세인장결합강도의 차이가 있었고, 높은 순서대로 나열하면 3 W, 2 W, 4 W 순이었다 (p<0.001). :상아질에 접착된 컴포지트 레진의 미세인장결합강도는 절삭방법과 접착시스템의 상호작용에 의해 유의한 영향을 받았다. 임상에서 레진 수복시, 2 W-3 W 범위내로 Er:YAG laser를 사용한다면 전통적 핸드피스 못지않게 수복물의 우수한 결합강도를 얻을 수 있다. 특히 시술시간의 단축, 과도한 산부식에 따른 부작용의 예방을 위해 Clearfil SE bond를 포함한 self etching system을 사용하고자 한다면 bur보다 Er:YAG laser를 이용한 삭제방법이 더 유용한 결합력을 제공할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. William JD, John TB, Anneke CB. Shear bond strength and SEM evaluation of composite bonded to Er:YAG laser-prepared dentin and enamel. Dental Materials 2005;21:616-624 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.11.003
  2. Sean L, Angelo A, Caputo PD, Lewis RL. Topographical characteristics and shear bond strength of tooth surfaces cut with a laser-powered hydrokinetic system. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:451-455 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70033-8
  3. Evans DJ, Matthews NB, Pitts CL, Longbottom C, Nugent ZJ. A clinical evaluation of an Erbium:YAG laser for dental cavity preparation. British Dental J 2000;188:677-679 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800575a
  4. Juliana DM, Sheila GS, Patricia MF et al. Tensile bond strength of a flowable composite resin to Er:YAG-laser-treated dentin. Lasers Surg Med 2005;36: 351-355 https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20176
  5. Juliano FS, Daniela TC, Maria CB et al. Comparative study of the dentin/adhesive systems interface after treatment with Er:YAG laser and acid etching using scanning electron microscope. Lasers Surg Med 2004;34:385-390 https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20064
  6. Kameyam A, Kawada T, Amagai M, Takizwa Y, Oda Y. Effect of HEMA on bonding of Er:YAG laserirradiated bovine dentine and 4-META/MMA-TBB resin. J oral Rehabilitat 2003;29:749-755
  7. Kameyama A, Oda Y, Hirai Y, Kawada E, Takizama M. Resin bonding to Er:YAG laser- irradiated dentin: combined effects of pre-treatments with citric acid and glutaraldehyde. Eur J Oral Sci 2001;109:354-360 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0722.2001.00075.x
  8. Meerbeek BV, Munck J, Mattar D. Microtensile bond strengths of an etch & rinse and self-etch adhesive to enamel and dentin as a function of surface treatment. Operative Dentistry 2003;28-5:647-660
  9. Sakakibala Y, Ishimaru K, Takamizu M. A study on bond strenght to dentin irradiated Er:YAG laser. Jpn J Conservative Dent 1998;41:207-219
  10. Ceballos L, Toledano M, Osorio R, Tay FR, Marshall GW. Bonding to Er:YAG laser treated dentin. J Dent Res 2002;81(2):119-122 https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910208100207
  11. Armengol V, Jean A, Hamel H. Scanning electron microscopic analysis of diseased and healthy dental hard tissues after Er:YAG laser irradiation:in vitro study. J. Endod 2000;26(2):95-99 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200002000-00009
  12. Kataumi M, Nakajima M, Yamada T, Tagami J. Tensile bond strength and SEM evaluation of Er:YAG laser irradiated dentin using dentin adhesive. Dent Mater J 1998;17:125-138 https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.17.125
  13. Visuri SR, Gilbert DD, Wright HA, Walsh JT. Shear strength of composite bonded to Er:YAG laser-prepared dentin. J Dent Res 1996;75(1):599-605 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345960750011401
  14. Cynthia PT, Patricia NR, John MP. Resin bond strength and micromorphology of human teeth prepared with an Er:YAG laser. Am J Dent 2004;17:331-336
  15. Marie FB, Daniel H, Michele MB, Samir N, Jean PR. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of resin-dentin interface after Er:YAG laser preparation. Lasers Surg Med 2004;35:51-57 https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20063
  16. Elisangela MM, Rosimeyri LW, Jejus DP. Bond strength to dentin of primary teeth irradiated with varying Er:YAG laser energies and SEM examination of the surface morphology. Lasers Surg Med 2004;34:254-259 https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20023
  17. Luciano B, Rolf D, Denise MZ. Changes in chemical composition and collagen structure of dentine tissue after erbium laser irradiation. Spectrochimica Acta Part A 2005;61:2634-2639 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2004.09.026
  18. Arturo MI, Luis SD, Francisco GR. Differences in bonding to acid-etched or Er:YAG-laser-treated enamel and dentin surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:280-288 https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.108600
  19. Aline ED, Silmara AM, Rengina GP, Maria CB, Jesus DP. Influence of Er:YAG laser on tensile bond strength of a self-etching system and a flowable resin in different dentin depths. J Dent 2004;32: 269-275 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2003.12.003
  20. Bouillague S, Gysi P, Wataha BC et al. Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional, one step, and self-etching adhesive systems. J Dent 2002; 29:55-61 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00049-X
  21. Kanemura N, Sano H, Tagami J. Tensile bond strength to and SEM evaluation of ground and intact enamel surfaces. J Dent 1999;27:523-530 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00008-1
  22. Nakajima M, Sano H. Bond strengths of single-bottle dentin adhesives to caries-affected dentin. Operative Dentistry 2000;25:2-10
  23. Mariane G, Silmara A, Maria CB, Jejus DP, Regina GP. Influence of pulse frequency Er:YAG laser on tensile bond strength of a composite to dentin. Am J Dent 2005;18:165-167
  24. Hossain M, Nakamura Y, Yamada Y et al. Ablation depths and morphological changes in human enamel and dentin after Er:YAG laser irradiation with or without water mist. J Clin Laser Med Surg 1999;17:105-109
  25. 김근아, 안용우, 고명연, 박준상. : Er:YAG laser를 이용한 법랑질과 상아질의 절삭율 연구. 대한구강내과학회지, 2005;30:131-140