新型陶瓷托槽的粘结强度与脱粘特性
Bond strength and debonding characteristics of a new ceramic bracket.
作者信息
Liu Jia-Kuang, Chung Ching-Hung, Chang Chuan-Yang, Shieh Dar-Bin
机构信息
Department of Dentistry, National Cheng Kung University, 138 Sheng-Li Road, Tainan 204, Taiwan, ROC.
出版信息
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Dec;128(6):761-5; quiz 802. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.03.041.
INTRODUCTION
The purposes of this study were to evaluate the shear bond strength of a new collapsible monocrystalline bracket (Inspire, Ormco, Orange, Calif) and compare it with another collapsible ceramic bracket (Clarity, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and a metal bracket; to examine the modes of failure after shear bond strength testing; and to observe the tooth surface after debonding the ceramic brackets with pliers.
METHODS
One hundred extracted human premolars were selected for bonding. Three types of brackets and 2 orthodontic adhesives (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek; and Enlight, Ormco) were used. After bonding, all samples were placed in a distilled water bath at 37 degrees C for 24 hours. The shear bond strength of 60 samples was measured, and the remaining 40 samples with ceramic brackets were debonded with pliers.
RESULTS
No statistically significant differences in bond strengths among the different combinations of brackets and adhesives were found (P > .05). The mode of failure after debonding by either shear bond strength testing or with pliers was predominantly at the bracket/adhesive interface in all groups. Enamel and bracket fractures were noted in 2 and 5 of 20 samples for Inspire, and 1 and 0 of 20 samples for Clarity after debonding with pliers.
CONCLUSIONS
Bond strength and mode of failure of Inspire were similar to those of Clarity, but the risk of bracket fracture after debonding for Inspire was greater.
引言
本研究的目的是评估一种新型可折叠单晶托槽（Inspire，奥美科公司，加利福尼亚州奥兰治）的剪切粘结强度，并将其与另一种可折叠陶瓷托槽（Clarity，3M Unitek公司，加利福尼亚州蒙罗维亚）和金属托槽进行比较；检查剪切粘结强度测试后的失效模式；并用钳子取下陶瓷托槽后观察牙齿表面。
方法
选择100颗拔除的人类前磨牙进行粘结。使用三种类型的托槽和两种正畸粘结剂（Transbond XT，3M Unitek公司；以及Enlight，奥美科公司）。粘结后，将所有样本置于37℃的蒸馏水中24小时。测量60个样本的剪切粘结强度，其余40个带有陶瓷托槽的样本用钳子取下。
结果
在托槽和粘结剂的不同组合之间，粘结强度没有统计学上的显著差异（P＞0.05）。通过剪切粘结强度测试或用钳子取下后，所有组的失效模式主要发生在托槽/粘结剂界面。用钳子取下后，Inspire组20个样本中有2个出现牙釉质和托槽断裂，Clarity组20个样本中有1个出现牙釉质和托槽断裂，0个出现托槽断裂。
结论
Inspire的粘结强度和失效模式与Clarity相似，但Inspire取下后托槽断裂的风险更大。
Zotero 插件