Nazir Mariyah, Walsh Tanya, Mandall Nicky A, Matthew Susie, Fox Dee
Orthodontic Department, University Dental Hospital Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Manchester, M15 6FH, UK.
J Orthod. 2011 Jun;38(2):81-9. doi: 10.1179/14653121141308.
To assess the effectiveness of banding versus bonding of first permanent molars during fixed appliance treatment; in terms of attachment failure, patient discomfort and post-treatment enamel demineralization.
Multi-centre randomized clinical trial.
One District General Hospital Orthodontic Department and two Specialist Orthodontic Practices.
Orthodontic patients aged between 10 and 18 years old, randomly allocated to either receive molar bands (n=40) or molar bonds (n=40).
Bands were cemented with a conventional glass ionomer cement and tubes were bonded with light-cured composite to all four first permanent molar teeth for each subject. Attachments were reviewed at each recall appointment to assess loosening or loss. The clinical end point of the trial was the day of appliance debond. Enamel demineralization at debond was assessed using the modified International Caries Assessment and Detection System (ICDAS).
The first time failure rate for molar bonds was 18·4% and 2·6% for molar bands (P=0·0002). Survival analysis demonstrated molar bonds were more likely to fail compared with molar bands. First permanent molars with bonded tubes experienced more demineralization than those with cemented bands (P=0·027). There was no statistically significant difference in discomfort experienced by patients after banding or bonding first permanent molars (P>0·05).
This study shows that as part of fixed appliance therapy, American Orthodontics photoetched first permanent molar bands cemented with 3M ESPE Ketac-Cem perform better than American Orthodontics low profile photo-etched and mesh-based first permanent molar tubes bonded with 3M Unitek Transbond XT in terms of failure behaviour and molar enamel demineralization.
评估在固定矫治器治疗期间,第一恒磨牙带环与粘结的有效性;从附件脱落、患者不适和治疗后牙釉质脱矿方面进行评估。
多中心随机临床试验。
一家地区综合医院正畸科和两家专科正畸诊所。
年龄在10至18岁之间的正畸患者,随机分为接受磨牙带环组(n = 40)或磨牙粘结组(n = 40)。
为每位受试者的四颗第一恒磨牙用传统玻璃离子水门汀粘结带环,并用光固化复合树脂粘结托槽。在每次复诊时检查附件,评估松动或脱落情况。试验的临床终点是矫治器拆除日。使用改良的国际龋病评估与检测系统(ICDAS)评估拆除矫治器时的牙釉质脱矿情况。
磨牙粘结的首次失败率为18.4%,磨牙带环为2.6%(P = 0.0002)。生存分析表明,与磨牙带环相比,磨牙粘结更易失败。粘结托槽的第一恒磨牙比粘结带环的牙釉质脱矿更严重(P = 0.027)。在粘结或带环第一恒磨牙后,患者所经历的不适没有统计学上的显著差异(P>0.05)。
本研究表明,作为固定矫治器治疗的一部分,用3M ESPE Ketac-Cem粘结的美国正畸光蚀刻第一恒磨牙带环比用3M Unitek Transbond XT粘结的美国正畸低轮廓光蚀刻和基于网的第一恒磨牙托槽在失败行为和磨牙牙釉质脱矿方面表现更好。