Chen Chen-Sheng, Hsu Ming-Lun, Chang Kin-Di, Kuang Shou-Hsin, Chen Ping-Ting, Gung Yih-Wen
School of Dentistry, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Angle Orthod. 2008 Nov;78(6):1071-7. doi: 10.2319/091907-449.1.
To determine the location and size of enamel fracture (EF) when debonding a bracket.
Tests on actual EF situations were conducted in different debonding load modes (tension, shear, and torsion) via mechanical testing, finite element model (FEM) analysis, and scanning electronic microscopy (SEM). Through these simultaneous analyses of the relationships among debonding load modes, value/distribution of stress, and actual enamel fracture location/size, an investigation was undertaken to explore the complex failure mode during enamel fracture after debonding of an orthodontic bracket.
The EF usually was located in the area where the force was exerted during various loading modes. The tensile, shear, and torsion debonding modes produce EF sizes and incidences with no significant differences. Findings on FEM matched the mechanical testing and SEM results.
The EF locations coincided with the areas where the tensile, shear, or torsion force was exerted. Therefore, the dentist should give extra care and attention to these specific areas of enamel after debonding. The sizes and incidences of EF produced by these three debonding modes showed no significant difference. Thus, clinically, when the sizes and incidences of produced EF are considered, it should not matter which of these three exerting forces is used to debond a bracket.
确定去除托槽时釉质骨折(EF)的位置和大小。
通过机械测试、有限元模型(FEM)分析和扫描电子显微镜(SEM),在不同的去除负荷模式(拉伸、剪切和扭转)下对实际的EF情况进行测试。通过对去除负荷模式、应力值/分布以及实际釉质骨折位置/大小之间关系的这些同步分析,对正畸托槽去除后釉质骨折期间的复杂失效模式进行了研究。
EF通常位于各种加载模式下施力的区域。拉伸、剪切和扭转去除模式产生的EF大小和发生率无显著差异。有限元模型的结果与机械测试和扫描电子显微镜结果相符。
EF的位置与施加拉伸、剪切或扭转力的区域一致。因此,牙医在去除托槽后应格外小心并关注这些釉质的特定区域。这三种去除模式产生的EF大小和发生率无显著差异。因此,在临床上,当考虑产生的EF的大小和发生率时,使用这三种施力方式中的哪一种来去除托槽并不重要。