Suppr超能文献

两种正畸去粘结方法的体内去粘结强度及釉质损伤

In vivo debonding strength and enamel damage in two orthodontic debonding methods.

作者信息

Brosh Tamar, Kaufman Assaf, Balabanovsky Alex, Vardimon Alexander D

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, The Maurice & Gabriela Goldschleger, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.

出版信息

J Biomech. 2005 May;38(5):1107-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.025.

Abstract

Bracket debonding strength related to diverse debonding methods and enamel damage has not been assessed in vivo. The study hypothetized a direct relationship between these three parameters. Debonding strength was measured clinically in the wings method and base method on 50 patients in a split mouth method using a calibrated debonding plier. Brackets from 30 of these patients were scanned in SEM and EDAX for adhesive remnant index and enamel calcium remnants. Base method debonding force was significantly greater than wings method (163.5+/-68.7 N, 106.1+/-66.2 N, respectively, p < 0.001). A positive adhesive remnant index score was found in both methods (68.7%, 66.7%, respectively). Debonding strength vs. adhesive remnant index or calcium index scores were not correlated. However, the latter two were significantly correlated (0.524 < R < 0.895, p < 0.031). Half of the debonding failures developed at the adhesive enamel interface. The results warnts the potential of enamel damage during debonding.

摘要

尚未在体内评估与不同脱粘方法和釉质损伤相关的托槽脱粘强度。该研究假设这三个参数之间存在直接关系。采用校准的脱粘钳,以分口法对50例患者的翼侧法和基底法进行临床脱粘强度测量。对其中30例患者的托槽进行扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和能谱分析(EDAX),以测定粘结剂残留指数和釉质钙残留量。基底法的脱粘力显著大于翼侧法(分别为163.5±68.7 N和106.1±66.2 N,p<0.001)。两种方法均发现粘结剂残留指数得分呈阳性(分别为68.7%和66.7%)。脱粘强度与粘结剂残留指数或钙指数得分无相关性。然而,后两者显著相关(0.524<R<0.895,p<0.031)。一半的脱粘失败发生在粘结剂与釉质界面。结果提示脱粘过程中存在釉质损伤的可能性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验