• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Effects of adhesive flash-free brackets on debonding pain and time: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial.黏结无托槽矫治器对脱胶疼痛和时间的影响:一项随机分组的临床研究。
Angle Orthod. 2020 Nov 1;90(6):758-765. doi: 10.2319/030820-162.1.
2
Particulate production during debonding of fixed appliances: Laboratory investigation and randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of using flash-free ceramic brackets.固定矫治器脱落后的颗粒产生:实验室研究和随机临床试验评估使用无闪光陶瓷托槽的效果。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Jun;155(6):767-778. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.02.010.
3
A comparative assessment of bracket survival and adhesive removal time using flash-free or conventional adhesive for orthodontic bracket bonding: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial.闪光或常规粘接剂用于正畸托槽粘接的托槽存活率和粘接剂去除时间的比较评估:一项分口随机对照临床试验。
Angle Orthod. 2019 Mar;89(2):299-305. doi: 10.2319/030918-195.1. Epub 2018 Sep 19.
4
Comparative assessment of bonding time and 1-year bracket survival using flash-free and conventional adhesives for orthodontic bracket bonding: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial.采用免冲洗和传统粘结剂黏结正畸托槽的粘结时间和 1 年托槽存留率的对比评估:一项分口随机对照临床试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Nov;154(5):621-628. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.05.012.
5
Debonding and adhesive remnant cleanup: an in vitro comparison of bond quality, adhesive remnant cleanup, and orthodontic acceptance of a flash-free product.脱粘与粘结剂残留清理:无飞边产品的粘结质量、粘结剂残留清理及正畸接受度的体外比较
Eur J Orthod. 2015 Oct;37(5):497-502. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cju080. Epub 2014 Dec 29.
6
Evaluation of shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index of metal APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system: A comparative in vitro study with APC™ II and uncoated metal brackets.金属 APC™ Flash-Free 黏结系统的剪切粘结强度和黏结残留指数评价:与 APC™ II 和无涂层金属托槽的体外对比研究。
Int Orthod. 2022 Dec;20(4):100705. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2022.100705. Epub 2022 Oct 22.
7
Flash-free and conventional adhesive ceramic brackets in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.接受正畸治疗患者使用无托槽和传统粘结陶瓷托槽的系统评价与荟萃分析
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2023 Feb;26(1):1-12. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12585. Epub 2022 May 10.
8
Effect of surface treatments and flash-free adhesive on the shear bond strength of ceramic orthodontic brackets to CAD/CAM provisional materials.表面处理和无闪光粘合剂对陶瓷正畸托槽与CAD/CAM临时材料之间剪切粘结强度的影响。
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):481-492. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04022-3. Epub 2021 Oct 4.
9
Effects of a flash-free system on dental plaque accumulation and bonding-debonding process: A clinical study.闪光系统对牙菌斑积聚和粘接-脱粘过程的影响:一项临床研究。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2023 Jan;163(1):54-59. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.08.024. Epub 2022 Oct 8.
10
Enamel around orthodontic brackets coated with flash-free and conventional adhesives.正畸托槽周围的牙釉质涂有免闪光型和传统型粘合剂。
J Orofac Orthop. 2020 Nov;81(6):419-426. doi: 10.1007/s00056-020-00241-7. Epub 2020 Jul 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Assessment of enamel surface roughness and hardness with metal and ceramic orthodontic brackets using different etching and adhesive systems: An study.使用不同蚀刻和粘结系统的金属和陶瓷正畸托槽对牙釉质表面粗糙度和硬度的评估:一项研究。
Saudi Dent J. 2023 Sep;35(6):641-650. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.05.015. Epub 2023 May 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Particulate production during debonding of fixed appliances: Laboratory investigation and randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of using flash-free ceramic brackets.固定矫治器脱落后的颗粒产生:实验室研究和随机临床试验评估使用无闪光陶瓷托槽的效果。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Jun;155(6):767-778. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.02.010.
2
Comparison of clinical bond failure rates and bonding times between two adhesive precoated bracket systems.两种预涂胶托槽系统的临床粘接失败率和粘接时间比较。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Apr;155(4):523-528. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.12.010.
3
Enamel demineralization around two different orthodontic bracket adhesive systems: An in vivo study.两种不同正畸托槽粘结系统周围的牙釉质脱矿:一项体内研究。
Saudi Dent J. 2019 Jan;31(1):99-104. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.11.005. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
4
Evaluation of pain perception during orthodontic debonding of metallic brackets with four different techniques.评价四种不同技术在金属托槽去粘接过程中的疼痛感知。
J Appl Oral Sci. 2019 Jan 7;27:e20180003. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0003.
5
Comparative assessment of bonding time and 1-year bracket survival using flash-free and conventional adhesives for orthodontic bracket bonding: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial.采用免冲洗和传统粘结剂黏结正畸托槽的粘结时间和 1 年托槽存留率的对比评估:一项分口随机对照临床试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Nov;154(5):621-628. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.05.012.
6
A comparative assessment of bracket survival and adhesive removal time using flash-free or conventional adhesive for orthodontic bracket bonding: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial.闪光或常规粘接剂用于正畸托槽粘接的托槽存活率和粘接剂去除时间的比较评估:一项分口随机对照临床试验。
Angle Orthod. 2019 Mar;89(2):299-305. doi: 10.2319/030918-195.1. Epub 2018 Sep 19.
7
Efficacy of different methods to reduce pain during debonding of orthodontic brackets.不同方法在正畸托槽去除过程中减轻疼痛的效果
Angle Orthod. 2016 Nov;86(6):917-924. doi: 10.2319/020116-88R.1. Epub 2016 May 12.
8
A new flash-free orthodontic adhesive system: A first clinical and stereomicroscopic study.一种新型无闪光正畸粘结系统:首次临床及体视显微镜研究。
Angle Orthod. 2016 Mar;86(2):260-4. doi: 10.2319/050415-302.1. Epub 2015 Aug 10.
9
What is the best method for debonding metallic brackets from the patient's perspective?从患者的角度来看,去除金属托槽的最佳方法是什么?
Prog Orthod. 2015;16:17. doi: 10.1186/s40510-015-0088-7. Epub 2015 Jun 17.
10
Debonding and adhesive remnant cleanup: an in vitro comparison of bond quality, adhesive remnant cleanup, and orthodontic acceptance of a flash-free product.脱粘与粘结剂残留清理:无飞边产品的粘结质量、粘结剂残留清理及正畸接受度的体外比较
Eur J Orthod. 2015 Oct;37(5):497-502. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cju080. Epub 2014 Dec 29.

黏结无托槽矫治器对脱胶疼痛和时间的影响:一项随机分组的临床研究。

Effects of adhesive flash-free brackets on debonding pain and time: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial.

出版信息

Angle Orthod. 2020 Nov 1;90(6):758-765. doi: 10.2319/030820-162.1.

DOI:10.2319/030820-162.1
PMID:33378510
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8028433/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of adhesive precoated (APC) flash-free brackets on the level of pain, amount of remnant adhesive, and removal time during the debonding procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients (20 female, 10 male) aged 12 to 18 years undergoing nonextraction fixed orthodontic treatment were included in this study. APC flash-free and conventional ceramic brackets were bonded with a split-mouth study design. Bracket types were randomly allocated to quadrants. During the removal of the brackets, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess the level of pain for each tooth. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was used to determine the amount of adhesive remaining on the tooth surface. Adhesive removal times were calculated per quadrant. The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test for comparisons between groups.

RESULTS

Pain scores were generally higher for the conventional group than for the flash-free group. There were no differences in VAS scores across most tooth types during debonding. Overall, ARI results showed more adhesive remnants in the conventional bracket group (P < .001). Except for the right maxillary quadrant, the times required to remove the adhesive were significantly longer for the flash-free brackets than the conventional brackets (P ≤ .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Although removal time was slightly longer for the flash-free adhesive than for the conventional adhesive, lower pain scores were generally observed for the flash-free adhesive brackets during the debonding procedure. Both time and pain differences could be considered clinically insignificant.

摘要

目的

评估预涂层(APC)无闪光托槽对去粘接过程中疼痛程度、残余粘接剂量和去除时间的影响。

材料和方法

本研究纳入了 30 名年龄在 12 至 18 岁之间接受非拔牙固定正畸治疗的患者(20 名女性,10 名男性)。采用分口研究设计,将 APC 无闪光和传统陶瓷托槽粘结。根据随机分配原则,将托槽类型分配到各个象限。在去除托槽时,使用视觉模拟评分(VAS)评估每颗牙齿的疼痛程度。使用粘接残余指数(ARI)评估牙齿表面残留的粘接剂量。计算每个象限的去除时间。使用 Wilcoxon 检验对组间数据进行比较。

结果

常规组的疼痛评分普遍高于无闪光组。在去粘接过程中,大多数牙齿类型的 VAS 评分没有差异。总体而言,传统托槽组的 ARI 结果显示更多的残余粘接剂(P <.001)。除了右上颌象限外,无闪光托槽去除粘接剂的时间明显长于传统托槽(P ≤.005)。

结论

尽管无闪光粘接剂的去除时间略长,但在去粘接过程中,无闪光粘接剂托槽的疼痛评分通常较低。时间和疼痛的差异可以被认为是临床无意义的。