School of Dentistry, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Dent Traumatol. 2010 Feb;26(1):30-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2009.00843.x.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the flexibility of five different splint systems [polyethylene fibre-reinforced splint (Ribbond THM, Ribbond Inc., Seattle, WA, USA), resin splint (RS), wire-composite splint (WCS), button-bracket splint (BS) and titanium trauma splint (TTS)] commonly used in clinical practice for the treatment of dental traumatic injuries involving the periodontal supporting tissues.
For the experimental study, a resin cast of the upper arch was manufactured, where teeth 11, 12 and 21 (used for the stress analysis) were inserted in a non-rigid fashion so as to allow for replacement, whereas the other teeth were permanently fixed to the corresponding sockets. Two different test sessions were performed for each splint: (i) stress analysis with increasing intensity ranging between 0 and 50 N directed along the tooth's longitudinal axis; (ii) stress analysis with 45 degrees of oblique force of increasing intensity ranging between 0 and 30 N. For each loading direction, five recordings were conducted without a splint, followed by five with the splint applied. The energy required to modify the position of the teeth was calculated for both the splinted and un-splinted teeth and the difference between the two values was determined. Energy variation was assessed for the testing of both axial (DeltaE(a)) and oblique force (DeltaE(o)). DeltaE represents the rigidity index of the analysed contention devices: high DeltaE values correspond to high rigidity materials.
The RS showed the highest DeltaE value for the axial stress analysis, whereas the highest DeltaE value at a 45 degrees was recorded for the WCS and RS. For both tests, the lowest DeltaE values were recorded for the TTS and Ribbond THM splints.
The data show that the contention devices with the highest flexibility are the TTS and the Ribbond THM as they exhibit a lower energy variation needed for splint deformation compared with the other materials that were examined.
本研究旨在评估五种不同夹板系统（聚对苯二甲酸乙二醇酯纤维增强夹板（Ribbond THM，Ribbond Inc.，西雅图，WA，美国）、树脂夹板（RS）、金属丝-复合材料夹板（WCS）、卡扣-托槽夹板（BS）和钛创伤夹板（TTS））在牙周支持组织受累的牙外伤治疗中的临床应用的灵活性。
对于实验研究，制作了上颌牙列的树脂模型，其中 11、12 和 21 牙（用于应力分析）以非刚性方式插入，以便可以更换，而其他牙齿则永久固定在相应的牙槽窝中。对于每种夹板，都进行了两次不同的测试：（i）沿牙齿长轴施加 0 至 50 N 逐渐增加的强度的应力分析；（ii）施加 0 至 30 N 逐渐增加的斜向力的应力分析。对于每个加载方向，在没有夹板的情况下进行了五次记录，然后在施加夹板的情况下进行了五次记录。计算了有夹板和无夹板牙齿的位置变化所需的能量，并确定了两个值之间的差异。对于轴向（DeltaE(a)) 和斜向力（DeltaE(o)) 的测试评估了能量变化。DeltaE 表示分析的固位装置的刚性指数：高 DeltaE 值对应于高刚性材料。
在轴向应力分析中，RS 显示出最高的 DeltaE 值，而在 45 度斜向力测试中，WCS 和 RS 记录到的 DeltaE 值最高。对于这两种测试，TTS 和 Ribbond THM 夹板记录到的 DeltaE 值最低。
数据表明，具有最高灵活性的固位装置是 TTS 和 Ribbond THM，因为与其他被检查的材料相比，它们在夹板变形所需的能量变化较小。
