切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版) ›› 2016, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (01) : 17 -21. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1366.2016.01.004

所属专题: 文献

基础研究

不同抛光系统对纳米树脂表面粗糙度和菌斑黏附的影响
马可1, 高燕1,(), 童忠春1, 蒋晓琼2, 林冬佳1   
  1. 1. 510055 广州,中山大学光华口腔医学院·附属口腔医院,广东省口腔医学重点实验室
    2. 518048 深圳,南方医科大学附属深圳妇幼保健院口腔病防治中心
  • 收稿日期:2015-12-21 出版日期:2016-02-01
  • 通信作者: 高燕
  • 基金资助:
    广东省科技计划(2010B031100023)

Influence of different finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness of nanofilled composite resin and adhesion of Streptococcus mutans

Ke Ma1, Yan Gao1,(), Zhongchun Tong1, Xiaoqiong Jiang2, Dongjia Lin1   

  1. 1. Guanghua School of Stomatology, Hospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Guangzhou 510055, China
    2. Stomatology Health Care Center, Shenzhen Maternity and Child Healthcare Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, Shenzhen 518048, China
  • Received:2015-12-21 Published:2016-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Yan Gao
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Gao Yan, Email:
引用本文:

马可, 高燕, 童忠春, 蒋晓琼, 林冬佳. 不同抛光系统对纳米树脂表面粗糙度和菌斑黏附的影响[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(01): 17-21.

Ke Ma, Yan Gao, Zhongchun Tong, Xiaoqiong Jiang, Dongjia Lin. Influence of different finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness of nanofilled composite resin and adhesion of Streptococcus mutans[J]. Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition), 2016, 10(01): 17-21.

目的

研究比较5种抛光系统处理纳米树脂后的表面粗糙度及其对细菌黏附程度的影响。

方法

Filtek Z350 XT纳米树脂制作54个样本,随机平均均分为6组,每组9个。其中5组为实验组(抛光组)分别用OptiDisc、HiLusterPlus、Sof-Lex、Super-snap以及Composite Polishing Kit CA0310等5种抛光系统修整、抛光,另1组不做抛光处理为对照组。激光共聚焦扫描显微镜测定样本表面粗糙度(Ra)。将上述样本与变异链球菌于体外混合培养24 h,测定其表面细菌黏附量。采用单因素方差(One-Way ANOVA)分析方法对样本表面粗糙度和生物膜菌落计数结果进行统计学分析。

结果

实验组中HiLusterPlus组的Ra值最低平均(0.196 ± 0.02)μm,与Composite Polishing Kit CA0310组相比差异有统计学意义(P= 0.016);其余各实验组间Ra值无显著差异,均能达到较低的粗糙度值。5个实验组的细菌黏附量均低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);5个实验组间的细菌黏附量差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

HiLusterPlus抛光系统处理纳米树脂可获得较低的表面粗糙度。系统抛光可明显降低纳米树脂材料表面细菌黏附量。

Objective

To investigate the effect of five different polishing systems on the surface roughness of nanofilled composite resin and adhesion of Streptococcus mutans.

Methods

The nanofilled composite resin were selected for this study named Filtek Z350 XT, fifty four specimens were prepared and divided into 6 groups randomly. Five polishing groups specimens were subjected to five different polishing system (OptiDisc, HiLusterPlus, Sof-Lex, Super-snap, Composite Polishing Kit CA0310) treatment, whereas one group received no further surface treatment. Average surface roughness (Ra) were assessed using confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM) . Then Streptococcus mutans adhered to the 6 groups specimens were cultured in vitro, and the bacterial adhesion amount was measured. ANOVA was used to assess the surface roughness of specimens and the bacterial adhesion amount.

Results

In the five polishing group, the lowest Ra value was obtained in the HiLusterPlus group, except it had lower value than Composite Polishing Kit CA0310 (P= 0.016) , there was no significant difference between the other groups, showing the low surface roughness all. There was no significant difference in bacterial adhesion amount between the five polishing groups, which was lower than that of the non-polishing group (P<0.05) .

Conclusions

The smoothest surface was obtained by Filtek Z350 XT with the use of the polishing system of HiLusterPlus. After polishing systems treatment the amount of the bacteria adhered to nanofilled composites resin decreased significantly.

表1 5种抛光套装使用方法
表2 5种抛光系统抛光后的平均粗糙度Ra值(μm,±s
图1 激光共聚焦扫描显微镜分析6组样本表面粗糙度的三维图片
图2 不同抛光系统处理后纳米树脂表面细菌黏附量
[1]
Lai GY, Zhu LK, Li MY,et al. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials[J]. J Prosthet Dent,2013,110(5):363-368.
[2]
Drummond JL. Degradation,fatigue,and failure of resin dental composite materials[J]. J Dent Res,2008,87(8):710-719.
[3]
Ferracane JL. Resin composite—state of the art[J]. Dent Mater,2011,27(1):29-38.
[4]
王南燕,欧阳勇.纳米填料复合树脂抛光后表面粗糙度及微结构的比较[J/CD].中华口腔医学研究杂志:电子版,2010,4(1):27-33.
[5]
Padovani GC, Fucio SB, Ambrosano GM,et al. In situ bacterial accumulation on dental restorative materials. CLSM/COMSTAT analysis[J]. Am J Dent,2015,28(1):3-8.
[6]
Fúcio SB, Carvalho FG, Sobrinho LC,et al. The influence of 30-day-old Streptococcus mutans biofilm on the surface of esthetic restorative materials—an in vitro study[J]. J Dent,2008,36(10):833-839.
[7]
Oliveira GU, Mondelli RF, Charantola Rodrigues M,et al. Impact of filler size and distribution on roughness and wear of composite resin after simulated tooth brushing[J]. J Appl Oral Sci,2012,20(5):510-516.
[8]
Hassan AM, Nabih SM, Mossa HM,et al. The effect of three polishing systems on surface roughness of flowable,microhybrid,and packable resin composites[J]. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent,2015,5(3):242-247.
[9]
Reis AF, Giannini M, Lovadino JR,et al. The effect of six polishing systems on the surface roughness of two packable resin-based composites[J]. Am J Dent,2002,15(3):193-197.
[10]
Sirin Karaarslan E, Bulbul M, Yildiz E,et al. Effects of different polishing methods on color stability of resin composites after accelerated aging[J]. Dent Mater J,2013,32(1):58-67.
[11]
St Germain H, Samuelson BA. Surface characteristics of resin composite materials after finishing and polishing[J]. Gen Dent,2015,63(2):26-32.
[12]
Bollen CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention:a review of the literature[J]. Dent Mater,1997,13(4):258-269.
[13]
Zhang X, Zhang Q, Yan T,et al. Quantitatively predicting bacterial adhesion using surface free energy determined with a spectrophotometric method[J]. Environ Sci Technol,2015,49(10):6164-6171.
[14]
Ionescu A, Wutscher E, Brambilla E,et al. Influence of surface properties of resin-based composites on in vitro Streptococcus mutans biofilm development[J]. Eur J Oral Sci,2012,120(5):458-465.
[1] 刘亚利, 陈雪松. 细胞骨架在乳腺癌中的研究进展[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 235-237.
[2] 蔡维霞, 曹涛, 赵明, 肖丹, 贾艳慧, 王璟, 张月, 王克甲, 韩军涛, 胡大海. Notch信号通路对烧伤大鼠血清诱导的肺血管内皮细胞细胞间黏附分子-1的影响[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(04): 292-299.
[3] 任琼, 吴东燕, 李中花, 石晶, 张静, 耿丽伟. 血清降钙素原、基质金属蛋白酶-9和可溶性细胞间黏附分子-1联合检测对绒毛膜羊膜炎的诊断价值[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 194-199.
[4] 王睿瑾, 张嘉琪, 衣颖杰, 吴国锋. 牙科可切削聚醚醚酮表面抛光性能的初步研究[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(05): 278-283.
[5] 陈熙, 马信奎, 黄月刚. 术前可溶性细胞间黏附分子1及中性粒细胞-淋巴细胞比值与结直肠癌临床病理特征的相关性分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2020, 14(02): 147-149.
[6] 张沥, 宋俊华, 何皓, 杨雪瑶, 周康. 血清D-D、PAI-1、sICAM-1水平与糖尿病合并肺部感染病情严重程度及预后的关系[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(02): 203-205.
[7] 高雪松, 刘慧慧, 张习巨. 经支气管针吸活检细胞黏附分子CD56、甲状腺转录因子-1水平与肺癌组织分型关系分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(06): 873-875.
[8] 孔菲, 王研, 吴昱华. 比阿培南联合莫西沙星对重症肺炎患者疗效、炎性因子及血清CD40L、VACM-1的影响[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(04): 533-535.
[9] 张蓉蓉, 宗海娟, 缪小云. 氨茶碱联合BiPAP治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的临床分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(03): 434-436.
[10] 先德飞, 曾义, 张乐. ICAM-1和S-100β在七氟醚联合硬膜外麻醉肺癌根治术后认知障碍分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 520-522.
[11] 邱壮光, 韦雪梅, 唐瑜, 徐志新. 氟比洛芬酯对肺癌围手术期患者氧化应激及血清VCAM-1、IMA的影响[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(01): 53-57.
[12] 常滋毓. 血清CD40L、VCAM-1及炎性因子在支气管哮喘合并肺炎支原体感染患儿中的表达及预后意义[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(04): 493-495.
[13] 夏杰, 唐紫萌, 吴向未. E-钙黏蛋白对血管内皮祖细胞和骨髓间充质干细胞之间的黏附作用研究[J]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2021, 11(06): 343-350.
[14] 马丹, 李雅楠, 张丽, 苗金红, 李学民, 胡晋平. 不同人工晶状体装载方法对术中襻与光学部黏附影响的临床研究[J]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(01): 24-29.
[15] 杨辉, 鲁利香, 易健, 易旭. 骨髓间充质干细胞及补脑Ⅰ号处理后血清对小鼠海马神经元缺氧缺糖模型ICAM-1、NF200表达的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(01): 100-106.
阅读次数
全文


摘要