Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, Saint Joseph University, Beirut, Lebanon.
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, Saint Joseph University, Beirut, Lebanon.
Int Orthod. 2022 Dec;20(4):100705. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2022.100705. Epub 2022 Oct 22.
The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) of the metal APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system, the APC™ pre-coated adhesive system and a conventional uncoated system.
One hundred eighty-six freshly extracted human premolars were randomly divided into 3 groups and bonded by a single operator. Group A/Control Group (60 teeth): the manual bonding group treated with Transbond™ XT Light Cure Adhesive Paste (3M™ Unitek). Group B (60 teeth): treated with APC™II metal maxillary premolar precoated brackets. Group C (66 teeth): treated with metal maxillary premolar APC Flash-Free brackets. The teeth were then stored in distilled water at 37̊C for 24hours, and five hundred cycles of thermocycling were performed. The Shear Bond Strength (SBS) test was performed using an Instron Universal Testing Machine, and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) was determined using a dental optical microscope at ×25 magnification.
The mean shear bond strength values showed differences between the three types of brackets (P=0.016; Anova). It was significantly higher with APC™II and lower with APC Flash-Free brackets; however, no significant differences were found between conventional and APC Flash-Free brackets (P-value=0.574). The distribution of the dichotomized ARI score was significantly different between the three brackets (P-value=0.049). The ARI score for APC Flash-Free brackets was higher with no significant difference between the conventional system and APC brackets (P-value=0.361).
The mean SBS values were not significantly different between APC Flash-Free metal brackets and uncoated metal brackets. The APC Flash-Free metal system's bond failure occurred at the bracket-adhesive interface, with the highest percentage of teeth having more than 50% of the residual composite on the enamel after debonding.
本体外研究旨在比较金属 APC™Flash-Free 粘结系统、APC™预涂粘结系统和传统未涂覆系统的剪切粘结强度 (SBS) 和粘结残留指数 (ARI)。
186 颗新鲜提取的人前磨牙随机分为 3 组,由同一位操作人员进行粘结。A 组/对照组(60 颗牙齿):使用 Transbond™XT 光固化粘结糊剂(3M™Unitek)进行手动粘结。B 组(60 颗牙齿):使用 APC™II 金属上颌前磨牙预涂覆托槽处理。C 组(66 颗牙齿):使用金属上颌前磨牙 APC Flash-Free 托槽处理。然后将牙齿储存在 37°C 的蒸馏水中 24 小时,并进行 500 次热循环。使用 Instron 万能试验机进行剪切粘结强度 (SBS) 测试,使用牙科光学显微镜在 ×25 放大倍数下测定粘结残留指数 (ARI)。
三种托槽的平均剪切粘结强度值存在差异(P=0.016;方差分析)。APC™II 明显较高,APC Flash-Free 较低;然而,传统托槽和 APC Flash-Free 托槽之间无显著差异(P 值=0.574)。三种托槽的二分ARI 评分分布差异有统计学意义(P 值=0.049)。APC Flash-Free 托槽的 ARI 评分较高,与传统系统和 APC 托槽之间无显著差异(P 值=0.361)。
APC Flash-Free 金属托槽与未涂覆金属托槽的平均 SBS 值无显著差异。APC Flash-Free 金属系统的粘结失效发生在托槽-粘结剂界面,脱粘后牙釉质上残留的复合树脂超过 50%的牙齿百分比最高。