Suppr超能文献

在将托槽粘结到复合树脂修复体上时是否应使用硅烷偶联剂?一项体外研究。

Should silane coupling agents be used when bonding brackets to composite restorations? An in vitro study.

作者信息

Eslamian Ladan, Ghassemi Amir, Amini Fariborz, Jafari Alireza, Afrand Mona

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Dental Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Eur J Orthod. 2009 Jun;31(3):266-70. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjn106. Epub 2009 Feb 4.

Abstract

The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine a safe and efficient method for bonding brackets to resin composite (RC), permitting the brackets to tolerate shear forces and allowing removal without causing surface damage to the aesthetic restoration. The shear bond strength (SBS) of 60 brackets bonded to silanated and non-silanated RC surfaces were compared. A Bis-GMA containing orthodontic adhesive system was used to bond stainless steel upper lateral incisor brackets to 60 composite discs, half of which had surface treatment with a silane coupling agent. SBS testing was performed with an Instron universal testing machine. After debond, the bracket base and corresponding RC discs were examined under a stereomicroscope and analyzed using the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). Non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney U) indicated significant differences between the two groups (P < 0.009). Lower bond strengths were found for the silanated group implying that silane agents may be an unnecessary step. However, both groups had a clinically acceptable mean SBS [silanated group = 13.1 megapascals (Mpa), non-silanated group = 19.4 MPa]. Bond failure occurred at the bracket-adhesive interface in both groups. There would appear to be no advantage in using a silane agent when bonding metal orthodontic brackets to filled RCs.

摘要

本体外研究的目的是确定一种安全有效的方法,将托槽粘结到树脂复合材料(RC)上,使托槽能够承受剪切力,并在去除时不会对美观修复体造成表面损伤。比较了60个粘结在硅烷化和非硅烷化RC表面的托槽的剪切粘结强度(SBS)。使用含双酚A甲基丙烯酸缩水甘油酯的正畸粘结系统,将不锈钢上颌侧切牙托槽粘结到60个复合树脂圆盘上,其中一半圆盘进行了硅烷偶联剂表面处理。使用Instron万能试验机进行SBS测试。脱粘后,在体视显微镜下检查托槽底座和相应的RC圆盘,并使用粘结剂残留指数(ARI)进行分析。非参数检验(曼-惠特尼U检验)表明两组之间存在显著差异(P < 0.009)。硅烷化组的粘结强度较低,这意味着硅烷剂可能是不必要的步骤。然而,两组的平均SBS在临床上都可以接受[硅烷化组 = 13.1兆帕(Mpa),非硅烷化组 = 19.4兆帕]。两组的粘结失败均发生在托槽-粘结剂界面。将金属正畸托槽粘结到填充的RC上时,使用硅烷剂似乎没有优势。

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