Suppr超能文献

使用直接和间接粘结方法的正畸托槽剪切粘结强度的比较 以及 。 你提供的原文似乎不完整,后面还有内容缺失。

Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Using Direct and Indirect Bonding Methods and .

作者信息

Demirovic Kenan, Slaj Martina, Spalj Stjepan, Slaj Mladen, Kobaslija Sedin

机构信息

Private Practice for Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.

出版信息

Acta Inform Med. 2018 Jun;26(2):125-129. doi: 10.5455/aim.2018.26.125-129.

Abstract

AIM

Aim of article was to compare the shear bond strength of indirectly and directly bonded orthodontic brackets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experimental study included 60 maxillary and mandibular premolars. Teeth were mounted on cold-cure acrylic blocks for each tooth separately and divided into two groups: directly bonded brackets (30 teeth) and indirectly bonded brackets (30 teeth). Brackets (Discovery, Roth 0.022", Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany) were bonded using Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA) in direct method, while in indirect technique, a combination of Transbond XT and Sondhi Rapid Set (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA) was used. The shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index (ARI) were evaluated. The study included 30 subjects - 15 with indirectly bonded brackets and 15 with directly bonded brackets. Survival rate was assessed during the period of 6 months.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in the shear bond strength was found in direct (7.48±1.61 MPa) and indirect labial bonding methods (7.8.2±1.61 MPa). Both methods produced very similar amount of adhesive remnant on tooth surface (median = 1; interquartile range 1-2). There were no significant differences in bracket survival rate between methods.

CONCLUSION

Regarding the shear bond strength, adhesive remnant on tooth surface, and survival rate, both indirect and direct methods of orthodontic bracket bonding seem to be equally valuable methods in clinical practice.

摘要

目的

本文的目的是比较间接粘结和直接粘结正畸托槽的剪切粘结强度。

材料与方法

实验研究包括60颗上颌和下颌前磨牙。将牙齿分别单独安装在冷固化丙烯酸块上,并分为两组:直接粘结托槽组(30颗牙)和间接粘结托槽组(30颗牙)。托槽(Discovery,Roth 0.022英寸,德国伊施普林根的登泰克公司)采用Transbond XT(美国加利福尼亚州蒙罗维亚的3M Unitek公司)直接粘结法粘结,而在间接粘结技术中,则使用Transbond XT和Sondhi快速固化剂(美国加利福尼亚州蒙罗维亚的3M Unitek公司)的组合。评估剪切粘结强度和粘结剂残留指数(ARI)。该研究包括30名受试者,其中15名使用间接粘结托槽,15名使用直接粘结托槽。在6个月的时间内评估存活率。

结果

直接粘结(7.48±1.61MPa)和间接唇面粘结法(7.82±1.61MPa)的剪切粘结强度没有统计学上的显著差异。两种方法在牙齿表面产生的粘结剂残留量非常相似(中位数=1;四分位间距1 - 2)。两种方法之间的托槽存活率没有显著差异。

结论

就剪切粘结强度、牙齿表面的粘结剂残留和存活率而言,正畸托槽粘结的间接法和直接法在临床实践中似乎都是同样有价值的方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bdb9/6029916/5b4f93380642/AIM-26-125-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验