Regalla Ravindra Reddy, Jadav Chandulal, Babu Devatha Ashok, Sriram Roopa Rani S, Sriram Sanjay Krishna, Kattimani Vivekanand S
Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Adilabad, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Government Dental College and Hospital, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2014 Jan 1;15(1):99-102. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1195.
Orthodontic treatment has gained popularity since beginning of era of dentistry. Now a day, everyone is conscious about their appearance, smile and function. During orthodontic treatment use of brackets and adhesives are common. The bonding of brackets will cause demineralization which requires the fluoridation. So the study has been under- taken to analyze the pattern of fluoride release by commercially available adhesive bonding material for the prevention of demineralization.
To evaluate and compare the clinical significance of quantity and pattern of fluoride release from three commercially available adhesives.
To assess the pattern of fluoride release and quantity, to reduce the decalcification of enamel around orthodontic brackets and bands during treatment and to prevent further use of topical fluoride both office and self-use agents for prevention of demineralization/for remineralization.
The comparison of quantity and pattern of fluoride release study involved commercially available bonding adhesives. They are: Group I--resin reinforced glass Ionomer light cure material (OrthoLC), Group II--fluoride releasing composite resin material (Excel) and Group III--conventional composite (Relay-a-bond) evaluated on 78 freshly extracted premolar teeth divided into three groups consisting 26 specimens in each group. The prepared specimens were stored in artificial saliva at 37°C in an incubator for subsequent fluoride analysis using ORION ion selective electrode coupled with ionalyzer 901. Fluoride analysis made at 24 hours intervals for first 3 consecutive days and thereafter at the end of 10th, 17th, 24th and 31st day of bonding. The data obtained were tabulated and interpreted by statistical analysis using 't' test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
The quantity of fluoride release in groups I and II was significant even at the end of 31st day. The one-way AVOVA showed intra and inter group significance in the quantity of fluoride release. But group III with zero fluoride release with significant decalcification on enamel which requires external use of topical fluorides. The pattern of fluoride released was 3.06 ppm for group I and 2.01 ppm for group II and was declined sharply after 24 hours; and continued to decline in subsequent weeks. Mean quantity of fluoride release by group I was 15.08 ppm were as group II was 9.02 ppm over the test period of 31 days. At the end of 31st day the group I bonding adhesive was releasing considerable amount of fluoride compared to group II whereas group III was nil. At all the periods inter and intra group mean values were highly significant. And group III acted as base line or control group as it was non-fluoride releasing material.
Both the fluoride releasing adhesive bond material are useful to reduce the risk of demineralization and further prevent the usage of topical fluoride application and reduce cost and clinical visiting time for both patient and clinician.
自牙科时代开始以来，正畸治疗就越来越受欢迎。如今，每个人都很在意自己的外表、笑容和功能。在正畸治疗过程中，使用托槽和粘合剂很常见。托槽的粘结会导致牙齿脱矿，这就需要进行氟化处理。因此，开展了这项研究，以分析市售粘结材料的氟释放模式，以预防脱矿。
评估和比较三种市售粘合剂氟释放量和模式的临床意义。
评估氟释放模式和量，减少正畸治疗期间托槽和带环周围牙釉质的脱钙，并防止进一步使用诊室和自行使用的局部用氟剂来预防脱矿/再矿化。
氟释放量和模式比较研究涉及市售粘结剂。它们是：第一组——树脂增强玻璃离子光固化材料（OrthoLC），第二组——含氟复合树脂材料（Excel），第三组——传统复合材料（Relay-a-bond）。在78颗新鲜拔除的前磨牙上进行评估，这些牙齿分为三组，每组26个样本。将制备好的样本置于37°C的人工唾液中，在培养箱中保存，随后使用与离子分析仪901联用的ORION离子选择电极进行氟分析。在粘结后的前连续3天，每隔24小时进行一次氟分析，此后在第10、17、24和31天结束时进行分析。获得的数据进行列表，并通过使用“t”检验和单因素方差分析（ANOVA）的统计分析进行解释。
即使在第31天结束时，第一组和第二组的氟释放量也很显著。单因素方差分析显示，组内和组间氟释放量具有显著性。但是第三组氟释放量为零，牙釉质有明显脱矿，需要外用局部用氟剂。第一组氟释放模式为3.06 ppm，第二组为2.01 ppm，24小时后急剧下降；在随后几周继续下降。在31天的测试期内，第一组平均氟释放量为15.08 ppm，第二组为9.02 ppm。在第31天结束时，与第二组相比，第一组粘结剂释放了大量氟，而第三组为零。在所有时间段，组内和组间平均值都具有高度显著性。第三组作为基线或对照组，因为它是无氟释放材料。
两种含氟粘结剂材料都有助于降低脱矿风险，进一步防止局部用氟剂的使用，并降低患者和临床医生的成本和就诊时间。
