Montasser Mona A, Taha Mahasen
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt.
Prog Orthod. 2014 Jul 18;15(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s40510-014-0034-0.
This paper aimed to study the effect of two enamel protective agents on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded with conventional and self-etching primer (SEP) adhesive systems.
The two protective agents used were resin infiltrate (ICON) and Clinpro; the two adhesive systems used were self-etching primer system (Transbond Plus Self Etching Primer + Transbond XT adhesive) and a conventional adhesive system (37% phosphoric acid etch + Transbond XT primer + Transbond XT adhesive ). Sixty premolars divided into three major groups and six subgroups were included. The shear bond strength was tested 72 h after bracket bonding. Adhesive remnant index scores (ARI) were assessed. Statistical analysis consisted of a one-way ANOVA for the SBS and Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Mann-Whitney test for the ARI scores.
In the control group, the mean SBS when using the conventional adhesive was 21.1 ± 7.5 MPa while when using SEP was 20.2 ± 4.0 MPa. When ICON was used with the conventional adhesive system, the SBS was 20.2 ± 5.6 MPa while with SEP was 17.6 ± 4.1 MPa. When Clinpro was used with the conventional adhesive system, the SBS was 24.3 ± 7.6 MPa while with SEP was 11.2 ± 3.5 MPa. Significant differences in the shear bond strength of the different groups (P = .000) was found as well as in the ARI scores distribution (P = .000).
The type of the adhesive system used to bond the orthodontic brackets, either conventional or self-etching primer, influenced the SBS, while the enamel protective material influenced the adhesive remnant on the enamel surface after debonding.
本文旨在研究两种牙釉质保护剂对使用传统和自酸蚀底漆（SEP）粘结系统粘结正畸托槽的剪切粘结强度（SBS）的影响。
使用的两种保护剂为树脂渗透剂（ICON）和Clinpro；使用的两种粘结系统为自酸蚀底漆系统（Transbond Plus自酸蚀底漆+Transbond XT粘结剂）和传统粘结系统（37%磷酸酸蚀+Transbond XT底漆+Transbond XT粘结剂）。纳入60颗前磨牙，分为三大组和六个亚组。托槽粘结72小时后测试剪切粘结强度。评估粘结剂残留指数评分（ARI）。统计分析包括对SBS进行单因素方差分析，对ARI评分进行Kruskal-Wallis检验，随后进行Mann-Whitney检验。
在对照组中，使用传统粘结剂时的平均SBS为21.1±7.5MPa，而使用SEP时为20.2±4.0MPa。当ICON与传统粘结系统一起使用时，SBS为20.2±5.6MPa，与SEP一起使用时为17.6±4.1MPa。当Clinpro与传统粘结系统一起使用时，SBS为24.3±7.6MPa，与SEP一起使用时为11.2±3.5MPa。发现不同组的剪切粘结强度存在显著差异（P = 0.000），ARI评分分布也存在显著差异（P = 0.000）。
用于粘结正畸托槽的粘结系统类型，无论是传统的还是自酸蚀底漆，都会影响SBS，而牙釉质保护材料会影响脱粘后牙釉质表面的粘结剂残留。
