Thind Bikram S, Stirrups David R, Lloyd Charles H
Department of Orthodontics and Restorative Dentistry, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Eur J Orthod. 2006 Feb;28(1):78-82. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cji076. Epub 2005 Sep 30.
This study investigated whether there were differences between the debond stress and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of an adhesive cured with three different orthodontic light sources. Sixty sound premolar teeth were divided into three groups of 20. A standard pre-adjusted edgewise premolar bracket (Victory Series) was bonded to each tooth using a light-cured orthodontic adhesive, Transbond X. Group 1 (control) specimens were cured with an Ortholux XT (tungsten-quartz-halogen bulb) light for 20 seconds, group 2 with an Ortho lite (plasma arc) for 6 seconds and group 3 with an Ortholux LED light-emitting diode for 10 seconds. The specimens were debonded 24 hours later using a universal mechanical testing machine, operating at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm minute(-1). The Weibull modulus and a Logrank test showed no statistically significant differences between the three groups for debond stress. The ARI was assessed at x10 magnification. The ARI scores for group 2 were significantly different (P < 0.01) from those of groups 1 and 3 (between which there was no significant difference). For group 2 there was a greater tendency for failure to occur at the adhesive/tooth interface than for the other two groups. There appears to be no reason why any of the three types of light source cannot be used in orthodontics. Polymerization, as effective as that produced by conventional bulb light sources, was obtained with the short exposure times recommended for the plasma arc or light-emitting diode sources.
本研究调查了用三种不同正畸光源固化的黏合剂在脱黏应力和黏附残留指数(ARI)方面是否存在差异。60颗健康的前磨牙被分为三组,每组20颗。使用光固化正畸黏合剂Transbond X将标准预调整方丝弓前磨牙托槽(Victory系列)黏附到每颗牙齿上。第1组(对照组)样本用Ortholux XT(钨-石英-卤素灯泡)光源照射20秒进行固化,第2组用Ortho lite(等离子弧)照射6秒,第3组用Ortholux发光二极管照射10秒。24小时后,使用万能材料试验机以0.5毫米/分钟(-1)的十字头速度将样本脱黏。威布尔模量和对数秩检验表明,三组在脱黏应力方面无统计学显著差异。在10倍放大倍数下评估ARI。第2组的ARI分数与第1组和第3组有显著差异(P < 0.01)(第1组和第3组之间无显著差异)。与其他两组相比,第2组在黏合剂/牙齿界面发生失效的趋势更大。似乎没有理由不能在正畸治疗中使用这三种光源中的任何一种。使用推荐给等离子弧或发光二极管光源的短曝光时间,可获得与传统灯泡光源产生的聚合效果一样有效的聚合效果。