von Arx T, Filippi A, Lussi A
Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Basle, Switzerland.
Dent Traumatol. 2001 Dec;17(6):266-74. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-9657.2001.170605.x.
Splinting is the standard of care for stabilization of replanted or repositioned permanent teeth following trauma. The present experimental study compared four dental trauma splints in 10 volunteers. The evaluated splints included a wire-composite splint (WCS), a button-bracket splint (BS), a resin splint (RS), and a new device (TTS=Titanium Trauma Splint) specifically developed for splinting traumatized teeth. All splints were bonded to the labial surfaces of the maxillary lateral and central incisors. Splints were left in place for 1 week. After splint removal, the next splint was placed after a 1-week rest period. The sequence of splint application was randomized for each individual. The following parameters were assessed: tooth mobility with horizontal and vertical Periotest values (PTV) before and after splint application and splint removal, respectively; probing depths, plaque and bleeding on probing indices before splint application and removal, and chair time needed for splint application and removal. After splint application, horizontal PTV were significantly lower in central incisors for BS compared to TTS (P=0.04), and for RS compared to TTS (P=0.005) and to WCS (P=0.006). Reduction of lateral tooth mobility (=splint effect) expressed by the difference between horizontal pre- and postoperative PTV was significantly greater in RS compared to TTS and WCS (P<0.05) for central as well as for lateral incisors. However, changes of vertical tooth mobility were not significant across the splinting techniques. Periodontal parameters remained unchanged, reflecting the excellent oral hygiene by the study subjects. The chair time needed for splint application was significantly shorter for TTS (P<0.01). In conclusion, all tested splints appeared to maintain physiologic vertical and horizontal tooth mobility. However, the latter was critically reduced in RS splints.
夹板固定是外伤后再植或复位恒牙稳定治疗的标准方法。本实验研究比较了10名志愿者使用的四种牙外伤夹板。评估的夹板包括钢丝-复合夹板(WCS)、纽扣-托槽夹板(BS)、树脂夹板(RS)以及一种专门为固定外伤牙而研发的新装置(TTS = 钛制外伤夹板)。所有夹板均粘结在上颌侧切牙和中切牙的唇面。夹板留置1周。夹板拆除后,休息1周再放置下一种夹板。每种夹板的应用顺序对每个个体都是随机的。评估了以下参数:分别在夹板应用前、应用后及拆除后,通过水平和垂直牙周探测值(PTV)评估牙齿松动度;夹板应用前和拆除前的探诊深度、菌斑及探诊出血指数,以及夹板应用和拆除所需的椅旁操作时间。夹板应用后,与TTS相比,BS固定的中切牙水平PTV显著降低(P = 0.04);与TTS相比,RS固定的中切牙水平PTV显著降低(P = 0.005),与WCS相比也显著降低(P = 0.006)。中切牙和侧切牙中,RS固定的牙齿水平术后与术前PTV差值所表示的侧向牙齿松动度降低(即夹板效果),与TTS和WCS相比显著更大(P < 0.05)。然而,不同夹板固定技术下垂直牙齿松动度的变化不显著。牙周参数保持不变,这反映了研究对象良好的口腔卫生状况。TTS应用夹板所需的椅旁操作时间显著更短(P < 0.01)。总之,所有测试的夹板似乎都能维持牙齿的生理垂直和水平松动度。然而,RS夹板对水平松动度的影响较大。