Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Aydin University, Florya, 34295, Istanbul, Turkey.
Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Jun;25(6):3987-3999. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03729-z. Epub 2021 Jan 6.
To investigate the clinical and in vitro performance of single-component orthodontic adhesives under metal brackets.
Bimaxillary orthodontic treatment was required for sixty patients and 60 premolar teeth were divided into three groups (n: 20). The single-component orthodontic adhesives Biofix and GC Ortho Connect (GC) that did not require primers were compared to the control group using Transbond XT, which was applied with a primer. For each patient, total bonding time was measured. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) score was noted over 12 months. In vitro tests were used to evaluate specimens, shear bond strength (SBS), ARI, and Enamel Surface Index (ESI). After in vitro debonding, the enamel surface and bracket base were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX).
Clinical failure rate with primer was 9.0%, while it was 8.0 and 10.0 for GC and Biofix, respectively. The mean in vitro SBS values of the Biofix, GC, and Transbond XT groups were 8.21, 8.07, and 7.37 MPa, respectively. There were no statistically differences in clinical failure (p = 0.160) and SBS values (p = 0.158). Mean differences in bond-up time per jaw were 9.65, 10.51, and 11.97 min, which were statistically significant (p = 0.0001).
Single-component adhesives had acceptable SBS values and enamel effects according to SEM-EDX analysis. Clinically, bonding failure was not shown statistically inferior to bonding with primer. There was also a significant difference in bond-up times.
Considering an intensely working clinic with bonding processes for at least two jaws per day, this means a saving of the chair time of 1 patient per week. However, better saliva contamination and moisture control with lack of the primer stage and, thereby, an acceptable bracket failure rate will bring clinically significant results with less chair time for clinicians.
研究单组分正畸粘接剂在金属托槽下的临床和体外性能。
60 名患者需要进行双颌正畸治疗，60 颗前磨牙分为三组（n：20）。将不需要底漆的单组分正畸粘接剂 Biofix 和 GC Ortho Connect（GC）与使用 Transbond XT 的对照组进行比较，Transbond XT 应用底漆。对于每个患者，测量总粘接时间。在 12 个月时记录黏附残余指数（ARI）评分。体外试验用于评估标本的剪切结合强度（SBS）、ARI 和釉质表面指数（ESI）。体外脱落后，使用扫描电子显微镜（SEM）和能谱分析（EDX）分析釉质表面和托槽基底。
使用底漆的临床失败率为 9.0%，GC 和 Biofix 分别为 8.0%和 10.0%。Biofix、GC 和 Transbond XT 组的平均体外 SBS 值分别为 8.21、8.07 和 7.37 MPa，无统计学差异（p=0.160）。临床失败（p=0.160）和 SBS 值（p=0.158）无统计学差异。每颌的粘结时间平均差异分别为 9.65、10.51 和 11.97 分钟，差异有统计学意义（p=0.0001）。
根据 SEM-EDX 分析，单组分粘接剂具有可接受的 SBS 值和釉质效果。临床结果表明，粘接失败与使用底漆无统计学差异。粘结时间也有显著差异。
考虑到每天至少要对两个颌进行粘结过程的忙碌临床环境，这意味着每周可为每位患者节省 1 次椅位时间。然而，由于缺少底漆阶段，更好地控制唾液污染和水分，以及可接受的托槽失败率，将为临床医生带来更短的椅位时间，具有显著的临床意义。
