Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Department of Orthodontics, Ahvaz, Iran.
Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Department of Orthodontics, Ahvaz, Iran.
Int Orthod. 2020 Jun;18(2):380-388. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2019.12.003. Epub 2020 Feb 6.
The effect of any sterilization methods (cold chemical, or hot) on film removal from coated archwires has not yet been investigated. Thus, we assessed it.
This double-blind randomized clinical trial was performed on 120 observations: 40 macroscopically intact coated archwires from 4 brands were purchased (n=10 archwires/brand). Five wires from each brand underwent cold and 5 underwent hot sterilization. Wires were applied in 40 non-extractions patients at alignment phase of treatment (one month). Afterwards, 3 inter-bracket segments from each wire were examined microscopically, and the percentage of coating loss was recorded for each segment. Coating losses of the 4 brands and 2 sterilization methods were compared using a two-way ANOVA and a Welch t-test (α=0.05). Surfaces were also evaluated using scanning electron microscopy.
The mean surface coating loss of hot (autoclave) and cold (glutaraldehyde) sterilization methods was 25.6±28.7 and 28.1±30.8 percent respectively. The mean surface coating removal of the Ortho Organizers, American Orthodontics, SIA, and Gestenco brands were 24.1±28.4, 36.7±36.0, 23.0±24.4, and 23.6±28.0 percent, respectively. The two-way ANOVA indicated a lack of overall significant differences among wire brands (P=0.189) and between sterilization types (P=0.629). However, the interaction of sterilization and brands was significant (P=0.005).
Within the limitations of this 1-month clinical trial limited to 4 coated NiTi archwire brands only, the average coating removal of examined brands might not differ much, amounting to about 26% within a month. Glutaraldehyde and autoclave sterilization might not affect the average speed of coating loss in all brands, although each sterilization method might be favourable for certain brands.
目前尚未研究任何灭菌方法（冷化学或热）对涂层弓丝去除薄膜的影响。因此，我们对此进行了评估。
这是一项双盲随机临床试验，共纳入 120 例观察：从 4 个品牌购买了 40 根宏观完整的涂层弓丝（每个品牌 10 根弓丝）。每个品牌的 5 根弓丝进行冷灭菌，5 根进行热灭菌。将这些弓丝应用于 40 名治疗阶段（一个月）无拔牙的患者。然后，从每根弓丝的 3 个托槽间片段进行显微镜检查，并记录每个片段的涂层损失百分比。使用双向方差分析和 Welch t 检验（α=0.05）比较 4 个品牌和 2 种灭菌方法的涂层损失。使用扫描电子显微镜评估表面。
热（高压灭菌器）和冷（戊二醛）灭菌方法的平均表面涂层损失分别为 25.6±28.7%和 28.1±30.8%。Ortho Organizers、American Orthodontics、SIA 和 Gestenco 品牌的平均表面涂层去除率分别为 24.1±28.4%、36.7±36.0%、23.0±24.4%和 23.6±28.0%。双向方差分析表明，各品牌之间（P=0.189）和灭菌类型之间（P=0.629）无总体显著差异。然而，灭菌和品牌的相互作用是显著的（P=0.005）。
在这项仅限于 4 个涂层 NiTi 弓丝品牌的为期 1 个月的临床试验的限制内，所检查品牌的平均涂层去除率可能没有太大差异，在一个月内约为 26%。戊二醛和高压灭菌可能不会影响所有品牌涂层损失的平均速度，尽管每种灭菌方法可能对某些品牌有利。
