Publication: Yapıştırma simanlarının çözünürlüğü
Abstract
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; iki farklı pH'ta hazırlanan laktik asit tampon solüsyonunda 7 farklı yapıştırma simanının asidik erozyonunu değerlendirmektir. Metot: Araştırmada kullanılan 7 farklı yapıştırma simanının (1adet çinko fosfat siman, Phosphate Cement, Heraeus Kulzer ; 2 farklı cam iyonomer siman, Ketac Cem, 3M ESPE ve Fuji I, GC; 1adet kapsüle edilmiş cam iyonomer siman, Fuji I Capsule, GC; 1 adet rezin modifiye cam iyonomer siman, Fuji Plus, GC; 1 adet rezin siman, Calibra, Dentsply ve 1 adet yüksek dolduruculu rezin siman, Variolink Ultra, Vivadent) erozyon miktarı, simanların PMMA içerisine yerleştirilip, iki farklı pH'ta ( pH= 2.74 ve 4.0) 0.1 M sodyum laktat/ laktik asit tampon solüsyonuna daldırıldıktan sonra oluşan siman kaybının derinliği ölçülerek bildirildi. Ölçümler simanların solüsyona daldırılmasını takip eden 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21 ve 28. günlerinde dijital mikrometre ile yapıldı. Sonuçlar varyans analizi kullanılarak istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Yapıştırma simanlarının 28 gündeki çözünürlük sonuçları (µm) aşağıdaki tabloda verilmektedir. pHPhosphateKetacCemFujiIFujiICapsFujiPlusCalibraVariolink Ultra 2.74187766613441350-8-4-6 4.092415288273-5-2-5 Siman tipi, pH seviyesi, zaman ve aralarındaki ilişkinin siman kaybındaki etkileri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu (p<0.001). Sonuç: Araştırmada kullanılan 4 farklı su bazlı simanın erozyonu solüsyon içerisinde kalma süresiyle doğru orantı gösterdi. Su bazlı simanlar her iki asit koşulunda yüksek oranda erozyon gösterirken, rezin bazlı simanlarda erozyon görülmedi. Ancak rezin bazlı simanlarda su absorbsiyonu sonucunda genleşme gözlendi. 2.
Solubility of Luting Cements in an Acidic Buffer Solution Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate acidic erosion of 7 different luting cements immersed in lactic acid buffer solutions of 2 different pH storage conditions. Methods: The erosion of 7 dental cements, a zinc phosphate cement (Phosphate Cement, Heraeus Kulzer), 2 different hand-mixed glass ionomers (Ketac Cem, 3M ESPE), (Fuji I, GC), an encapsulated glass ionomer (Fuji I Capsule, GC), a resin modified glass ionomer (Fuji Plus, GC), a resin cement (Calibra, Dentsply) and a highly filled resin cement (Variolink Ultra, Vivadent) were evaluated by measuring the depth loss of the cement after placement in a cylindrical cavity in PMMA and immersion in 0.1 M aqueous sodium lactate/ lactic acid buffer (pH =2.74 and 4.0). The depth loss was measured by a digital dial gauge, at 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days following immersion. The data was analyzed by Repeated measures analysis of variance. Results: The depth loss (in µm) at 28 days are given below: pHPhosphateKetacCemFujiIFujiICapsFujiPlusCalibraVariolink Ultra 2.74187766613441350-8-4-6 4.092415288273-5-2-5 Cement type, pH level, time, and their interactions all had statistically significant effects on depth loss (p<0.001). Conclusions: A linear relationship for erosion against time was observed for all 4 water-based cements. Water-based cements showed higher erosion for both acid conditions, whereas resin-based cements did not show a depth loss but rather hygroscopic expansion due to water sorption.
Solubility of Luting Cements in an Acidic Buffer Solution Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate acidic erosion of 7 different luting cements immersed in lactic acid buffer solutions of 2 different pH storage conditions. Methods: The erosion of 7 dental cements, a zinc phosphate cement (Phosphate Cement, Heraeus Kulzer), 2 different hand-mixed glass ionomers (Ketac Cem, 3M ESPE), (Fuji I, GC), an encapsulated glass ionomer (Fuji I Capsule, GC), a resin modified glass ionomer (Fuji Plus, GC), a resin cement (Calibra, Dentsply) and a highly filled resin cement (Variolink Ultra, Vivadent) were evaluated by measuring the depth loss of the cement after placement in a cylindrical cavity in PMMA and immersion in 0.1 M aqueous sodium lactate/ lactic acid buffer (pH =2.74 and 4.0). The depth loss was measured by a digital dial gauge, at 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days following immersion. The data was analyzed by Repeated measures analysis of variance. Results: The depth loss (in µm) at 28 days are given below: pHPhosphateKetacCemFujiIFujiICapsFujiPlusCalibraVariolink Ultra 2.74187766613441350-8-4-6 4.092415288273-5-2-5 Cement type, pH level, time, and their interactions all had statistically significant effects on depth loss (p<0.001). Conclusions: A linear relationship for erosion against time was observed for all 4 water-based cements. Water-based cements showed higher erosion for both acid conditions, whereas resin-based cements did not show a depth loss but rather hygroscopic expansion due to water sorption.