Aggarwal M, Foley T F, Rix D
School of Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Angle Orthod. 2000 Aug;70(4):308-16. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2000)070<0308:ACOSPB>2.0.CO;2.
The objective of this study was to compare the shear-peel band strength of 5 orthodontic cements using both factory and in-office micro-etched bands. The 5 orthodontic cements evaluated were a zinc phosphate (Fleck's Cement), 2 resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGI)(3M Multicure glass ionomer and Optiband), and 2 polyacid-modified composite resin cements (PMCR)(Transbond Plus and Ultra Band Lok). Salivary contamination was examined with a polyacid-modified composite resin (Transbond Plus). Two hundred and eighty extracted human molar teeth were embedded in resin blocks and each was randomly assigned to the following 7 groups: 6 groups with factory etched bands, 5 cement groups and salivary contaminated group, and 1 in-office micro-etched group. The cemented teeth were put in deionized water at 37 degrees C for 30 days and thermocycled for 24 hours. The force required to break the cement bond was used as a measure of shear-peel band retention. With the use of an Instron testing machine, a shear-peel load was applied to each cemented band. Data were analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey test for the multiple comparisons. The RMGIs and PMCRs demonstrated significantly greater shear-peel band strengths compared to the zinc phosphate cement. No statistically significant differences were noted between the RMGI cement and PMCR cements and within the RMGI groups, however, there was a statistically significant difference within the PMCR groups. Significantly lower band strengths were noted with the saliva contaminated PMCR cement group (Transbond Plus) and the inpractice sandblasted PMCR group. Both RMGIs and PMCRs were found to demonstrate favorable banding qualities. The lower band strength with saliva-contaminated bands suggests that moisture control is critical when using a PMCR. The variability noted in the in-office micro-etched bands might be technique related.
本研究的目的是比较5种正畸粘结剂在使用厂家预蚀刻带环和诊室微蚀刻带环时的剪切-剥离带环强度。所评估的5种正畸粘结剂分别是磷酸锌粘结剂(弗莱克粘结剂)、2种树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(RMGI)(3M多固化玻璃离子水门汀和Optiband)以及2种聚酸改性复合树脂粘结剂(PMCR)(Transbond Plus和Ultra Band Lok)。使用聚酸改性复合树脂(Transbond Plus)检测唾液污染情况。280颗拔除的人磨牙被嵌入树脂块中,每颗牙齿随机分为以下7组:6组使用厂家蚀刻带环,包括5个粘结剂组和唾液污染组,以及1个诊室微蚀刻组。将粘结后的牙齿置于37℃的去离子水中30天,并进行24小时的热循环。使粘结剂粘结断裂所需的力作为剪切-剥离带环固位的衡量指标。使用英斯特朗测试机对每个粘结带环施加剪切-剥离载荷。数据采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)并结合Tukey检验进行多重比较。与磷酸锌粘结剂相比,RMGI和PMCR的剪切-剥离带环强度显著更高。RMGI粘结剂和PMCR粘结剂之间以及RMGI组内未观察到统计学上的显著差异,然而,PMCR组内存在统计学上的显著差异。唾液污染的PMCR粘结剂组(Transbond Plus)和临床实践中喷砂处理的PMCR组的带环强度显著较低。RMGI和PMCR均表现出良好的带环性能。唾液污染带环时带环强度较低表明,使用PMCR时控制湿度至关重要。诊室微蚀刻带环中观察到的变异性可能与技术有关。