본 연구는 합착 술식에 따른 레진 합착제의 상아질에 대한 미세전단결합강도를 비교 연구하여 이중 접착 술식의 유용성을 평가하고자 시행되었다. 합착 술식은 전통 합착 술식과 이중 접착 술식, 임시 합착제는 Propac과 Freegenol, 상아질 접착제는 All-Bond 2, One-Step, Clearfil SE Bond를 사용하였다. 이중 접착 술식을 적용한 군에서만 상아질 접착제 처리 후, 모든 시편에 임시 합착제를 도포하였다. 이후 임시 합착제를 제거하고 상아질 접착제 적용 후 유리봉에 레진 합착제를 도포하여 상아질 면에 접착하였다. 미세전단결합 강도를 측정하고 접착 계면을 주사전자현미경으로 관찰하였다. 1. 전통 합착 술식이 이중 접착 술식보다 높은 미세전단결합강도를 보였으나 통계학적 유의 차가 없었다. 2. Freegenol이 Propac보다 높은 미세전단결합강도를 보였으나 유의차가 없었다. 3. 미세전단결합강도는 이중 접착 술식 을 적용한 경우 Clearfil SE Bond가 One-step, All-Bond 2보다 유의성 있게 높았으나(p<0.05) One-step, All-Bond 2 간 유의차는 없었다. 4. 전자현미경 소견에서 All-Bond 2와 One-Step을 사용한 군은 길고 수많은 resin tag가 관찰되었다. 본 연구 결과 전통 합착 술식과 비교하여 이중 접착 술식의 우수함을 확인하지 못하였다.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of dual bonding technique by comparing microshear bond strength between two different luting methods of resin cement to tooth dentin. Three dentin bonding systems(All-Bond 2, One-Step, Clearfil SE Bond), two temporary cements (Propac, Freegenol) were used in this study. In groups used conventional luting procedure, dentin surfaces were left untreated. In groups used dual bonding technique, three dentin bonding systems were applied to each dentin surface. All specimens were covered with each temporary cement. The temporary cements were removed and each group was treated using one of three different dentin bonding system. A resin cement was applied to the glass cylinder surface and the cylinder was bonded to the dentin surface. Then, micro-shear bond strength test was performed. For the evaluation of the morphology at the resin/dentin interface, SEM examination was also performed. 1. Conventional luting procedure showed higher micro-shear bond strengths than dual boning technique. However, there were no significant differences. 2. Freegenol showed higher micro-shear bond strengths than Propac, but there were no significant differences. 3. In groups used dual bonding technique, SE Bond showed significantly higher micro-shear bond strengths in One-Step and All-Bond 2 (p<0.05), but there was no significant difference between One-Step and All-Bond 2. 4. In SEM observation, with the use of All-Bond 2 and One-Step, very long and numerous resin tags were observed. This study suggests that there were no findings that the dual bonding technique would be better than the conventional luting procedure.
