Nakano H, Satoh K, Norris R, Jin T, Kamegai T, Ishikawa F, Katsura H
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Iwate Medical University, Morioka, Japan.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Apr;115(4):390-5. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70257-x.
The purpose of this study was to clarify the mechanical properties of 42 brands of nickel-titanium alloy orthodontic wires from 9 manufacturers by conducting three-point bending tests under uniform testing conditions. Manufacturers included A-Company, Hoya Medical, Lancer, Ormco, Rocky Mountain, Sankin, Tomy (GAC), TP, and 3M/Unitek. Cobalt-chrome, and titanium-molybdenum alloy wires were also tested as a reference for comparison of force levels. All reported data were recorded during the unloading process to simulate the force that a wire exerts on a tooth as it is moved into the dental arch from a position of malocclusion. The following results were obtained for the nickel-titanium wires tested. (1) Among the 0.016 inch round wires tested under a maximum deflection of 1.5 mm, the difference between the smallest (Copper nickel-titanium 35) and the largest (Aline) load values was 136 g. For the 0.016 x 0.022 inch rectangular wires tested, the difference between the smallest (Copper nickel-titanium 40) and the largest (Aline) load values was 337 g. (2) The change in load between 1.5 and 0.5 mm of deflection was examined to clarify the superelastic properties of the wires tested. For the 0.016 inch wires, 17 wire brands produced a load difference of less than 100 g, and two brands produced a difference of at least 100 g (Aline and Titanal = 100 g). For the 0.016 x 0.022 inch wires, 15 brands produced a load difference of less than 100 g, and eight brands produced a difference of over 100 g. The smallest and largest load differences were 3 g (Copper nickel-titanium 35) and 200 g (Aline). (3) The majority of the samples with a smaller load difference between deflections of 1.5 mm and 0.5 mm in the unloading process were found among super-elastic wires, while samples with a larger load difference were predominantly found among work-hardened wires. Compared with cobalt-chrome and TMA wires, nickel-titanium alloy wires exert significantly less force. However, the amount of force varies greatly from brand to brand. Consequently, when using nickel-titanium alloy wires, brands must be selected carefully by taking into consideration the severity of the malocclusion and the stage of orthodontic treatment in each case. It is the intent of this study to offer clinicians an unbiased guide for the selection of appropriate nickel-titanium alloy wires.
本研究的目的是通过在统一测试条件下进行三点弯曲试验,阐明9家制造商生产的42个品牌镍钛合金正畸丝的力学性能。制造商包括A公司、豪雅医疗、蓝瑟、奥美科、落基山、三金、多美(GAC)、TP和3M/Unitek。还测试了钴铬合金丝和钛钼合金丝作为力水平比较的参考。所有报告的数据均在卸载过程中记录,以模拟正畸丝从错颌位置移入牙弓时对牙齿施加的力。对测试的镍钛丝获得了以下结果。(1) 在最大挠度为1.5毫米的条件下测试的0.016英寸圆形丝中,最小(铜镍钛35)和最大(Aline)载荷值之间的差异为136克。对于测试的0.016×0.022英寸矩形丝,最小(铜镍钛40)和最大(Aline)载荷值之间的差异为337克。(2) 检查了挠度从1.5毫米到0.5毫米之间的载荷变化,以阐明测试丝的超弹性性能。对于0.016英寸的丝,17个丝品牌的载荷差异小于100克,两个品牌的差异至少为100克(Aline和Titanal = 100克)。对于0.016×0.022英寸的丝,15个品牌的载荷差异小于100克,8个品牌的差异超过100克。最小和最大载荷差异分别为3克(铜镍钛35)和200克(Aline)。(3) 在卸载过程中,挠度在1.5毫米和0.5毫米之间载荷差异较小的大多数样品是超弹性丝,而载荷差异较大的样品主要是加工硬化丝。与钴铬合金丝和TMA丝相比,镍钛合金丝施加的力明显较小。然而,力的大小因品牌而异。因此,在使用镍钛合金丝时,必须根据每个病例的错颌严重程度和正畸治疗阶段仔细选择品牌。本研究旨在为临床医生提供一个选择合适镍钛合金丝的客观指南。