Paschos Ekaterini, Kurochkina Natascha, Huth Karin C, Hansson Clara S, Rudzki-Janson Ingrid
Department of Orthodontics, Dental School, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 May;135(5):613-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.01.016.
Our aim in this randomized clinical trial was to compare the failure rates of orthodontic brackets by using 2 self-etching primers (SEPs) (Transbond Plus [3M Unitek, Seefeld, Germany] and Clearfil Protect Bond [Kuraray Medical, Okayama, Japan]) with a split-mouth design. Additionally, the effect of Clearfil Protect Bond was investigated regarding inhibition of plaque accumulation and demineralization.
A total of 480 brackets were bonded in 24 patients with the SEPs. The observation period was 12 months. One week after bonding and at every third recall, the plaque index and a visual rating of the enamel adjacent to the bracket were assessed at the lateral incisors and the first premolars. Additionally, DIAGNOdent (KaVo, Biberach, Germany) values were measured.
Over the investigation time, 26 failures were recorded. Five occurred with the brackets bonded with Transbond Plus, and the rest with Clearfil Protect Bond (P = 0.002). The additionally observed parameters had no significant differences.
The failure rate with Clearfil Protect Bond was significantly higher. For our patients, who had adequate oral hygiene, there was no benefit with regard to plaque accumulation and prevention of demineralization with Clearfil Protect Bond.
在这项随机临床试验中，我们的目的是采用双盲设计，比较两种自酸蚀底漆（SEPs）（Transbond Plus[德国赛费尔德3M Unitek公司]和Clearfil Protect Bond[日本冈山可乐丽医疗公司]）用于正畸托槽时的失败率。此外，还研究了Clearfil Protect Bond在抑制牙菌斑积聚和脱矿方面的效果。
使用SEPs为24例患者粘结了总共480个托槽。观察期为12个月。粘结后1周以及每次复诊时，对侧切牙和第一前磨牙处的菌斑指数以及托槽旁牙釉质的视觉评分进行评估。此外，还测量了DIAGNOdent（德国比伯拉赫卡瓦公司）的值。
在研究期间，记录到26次失败。其中5次发生在用Transbond Plus粘结的托槽上，其余发生在用Clearfil Protect Bond粘结的托槽上（P = 0.002）。另外观察到的参数没有显著差异。
Clearfil Protect Bond的失败率显著更高。对于口腔卫生良好的我们的患者而言，Clearfil Protect Bond在牙菌斑积聚和预防脱矿方面并无益处。
