Suppr超能文献

使用不同粘结系统粘结的正畸托槽下的微渗漏

Microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with different adhesive systems.

作者信息

Alkis Huseyin, Turkkahraman Hakan, Adanir Necdet

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Süleyman Demirel Univeristy, Isparta, Turkiye.

Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Süleyman Demirel Univeristy, Isparta, Turkiye.

出版信息

Eur J Dent. 2015 Jan-Mar;9(1):117-121. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.149656.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This in vitro study aimed to compare the microleakage of orthodontic brackets between enamel-adhesive and adhesive-bracket interfaces at the occlusal and gingival margins bonded with different adhesive systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 144 human maxillary premolar teeth extracted for orthodontic reasons was randomly divided into four groups. Each group was then further divided into three sub-groups. Three total-etching bonding systems (Transbond XT, Greengloo and Kurasper F), three one-step self-etching bonding systems (Transbond Plus SEP, Bond Force and Clearfil S3), three two-step self-etching bonding systems (Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil Protectbond and Clearfil Liner Bond), and three self-adhesive resin cements (Maxcem Elite, Relyx U 100 and Clearfil SA Cement) were used to bond the brackets to the teeth. After bonding, all teeth were sealed with nail varnish and stained with 0.5% basic fuchsine for 24 h. All samples were sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope to score for microleakage at the adhesive-enamel and adhesive-bracket interfaces from both occlusal and gingival margins.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

Statistical analyses were performed with Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.

RESULTS

The results indicate no statistically significant differences between the microleakage scores of the adhesives; microleakage was detected in all groups. Comparison of the average values of the microleakage scores in the enamel-adhesive and adhesive-bracket interfaces indicated statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). The amount of the microleakage was higher at the enamel-adhesive interface than at the bracket-adhesive interface.

CONCLUSIONS

All of the brackets exhibited some amount of microleakage. This result means that microleakage does not depend on the type of adhesive used.

摘要

目的

本体外研究旨在比较在使用不同粘结系统粘结的情况下,正畸托槽在咬合面和龈缘处的釉质 - 粘结剂界面与粘结剂 - 托槽界面的微渗漏情况。

材料与方法

因正畸原因拔除的144颗人类上颌前磨牙被随机分为四组。每组再进一步分为三个亚组。使用三种全酸蚀粘结系统(Transbond XT、Greengloo和Kurasper F)、三种一步法自酸蚀粘结系统(Transbond Plus SEP、Bond Force和Clearfil S3)、三种两步法自酸蚀粘结系统(Clearfil SE Bond、Clearfil Protectbond和Clearfil Liner Bond)以及三种自粘结树脂水门汀(Maxcem Elite、Relyx U 100和Clearfil SA Cement)将托槽粘结到牙齿上。粘结后,所有牙齿用指甲油密封,并用0.5%碱性品红染色24小时。所有样本均进行切片,并在体视显微镜下检查,以评估在咬合面和龈缘处的粘结剂 - 釉质界面和粘结剂 - 托槽界面的微渗漏情况并评分。

所用统计分析方法

采用Kruskal - Wallis检验和Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行统计分析。

结果

结果表明,各粘结剂的微渗漏评分之间无统计学显著差异;所有组均检测到微渗漏。釉质 - 粘结剂界面和粘结剂 - 托槽界面微渗漏评分的平均值比较显示有统计学显著差异(P < 0.05)。釉质 - 粘结剂界面的微渗漏量高于托槽 - 粘结剂界面。

结论

所有托槽均表现出一定程度的微渗漏。这一结果意味着微渗漏并不取决于所使用的粘结剂类型。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

4
Effects of high-intensity curing lights on microleakage under orthodontic bands.正畸带微渗漏下高强度固化灯的影响。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Aug;138(2):201-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.09.032.
10
Bracket bond strengths of new adhesive systems.新型粘结系统的托槽粘结强度
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jun;135(6):771-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.06.021.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验