Mifsud S, Lagneau C, Lissac M, Grosgogeat B
LEIBO, Faculté d'Odontologie de Lyon, France.
Biomed Mater Eng. 2005;15(4):269-77.
The aim of this study is to compare the efficiency of two polymerization techniques (halogen curing--Astralis 7 and plasma curing--Flipo), with two orthodontic adhesive materials (Enlight, a composite resin, and Fuji Ortho LC, a glass ionomer cement).
The efficiency of the polymerization techniques was shown by two mechanical tests. The hardness test was carried out on the exposed and non-exposed surfaces using 10 x 4 x 3-mm samples, polymerized either by halogen curing (40 seconds) or by plasma curing (5 seconds). The three-point bending tests were carried out on 2 x 2 x 25-mm samples polymerized as above. The samples were kept 1 hr at room temperature, then for 24 hrs in distilled water at 37 degrees C.
Whatever the polymerization technique used, the results are similar for hardness and flexion, with the exception of the hardness tests carried out after polymerization with the Flipo light on the surface not directly exposed.
In orthodontic practice, both polymerization techniques can be used. But a multi-bracket session can be long, and the reduction of time spent in the chair obtained by using plasma lamps seems to make this technique preferable.
本研究旨在比较两种聚合技术（卤素固化——Astralis 7和等离子体固化——Flipo）与两种正畸粘结材料（复合树脂Enlight和玻璃离子水门汀Fuji Ortho LC）的效率。
通过两项力学测试来显示聚合技术的效率。使用10×4×3毫米的样本，对暴露和未暴露的表面进行硬度测试，样本通过卤素固化（40秒）或等离子体固化（5秒）进行聚合。对按上述方法聚合的2×2×25毫米样本进行三点弯曲测试。样本在室温下保持1小时，然后在37摄氏度的蒸馏水中保持24小时。
无论使用何种聚合技术，硬度和弯曲度的结果相似，但使用Flipo灯聚合后在未直接暴露的表面进行的硬度测试除外。
在正畸实践中，两种聚合技术均可使用。但多托槽治疗过程可能较长，使用等离子灯减少在诊椅上花费的时间似乎使该技术更具优势。
