Suppr超能文献

人工唾液对牙间橡胶牙间清洁力的影响:体外比较。

The influence of artificial saliva on the cleaning force of interdental rubber picks: an in-vitro comparison.

机构信息

Clinic of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus B, 24105, Kiel, Germany.

Institute of Mechatronics, Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Kiel University of Applied Sciences, Kiel, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Oral Health. 2022 Nov 1;22(1):459. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02479-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The familiar aids for interdental cleaning such as dental floss or interdental brushes (IDB) are often associated with difficult handling or an increased potential for trauma. Interdental picks (IRP), which have no metal core and silicone flaps instead of nylon brushes, offer the alternative. However, in-vitro studies found a lower cleaning effectiveness combined with higher forces for cleaning compared with conventional IDBs. The aim of this in-vitro study was to measure the experimental cleaning forces (ECF) using IRP with versus without an artificial saliva (AS; GUM Hydral, Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland).

METHODS

The test set-up was developed to investigate the cleaning of 3D-printed interdental area (IDR) mimicking human teeth (Form 2, Formlabs Sommerville, MA, USA) under standardized conditions. Three different morphologies (isosceles triangle, convex, concave) and three different sizes (1.0 mm,1.1 mm,1.3 mm) were used. Two different IRPs (GUM Soft-picks Advanced: SPA versus GUM Soft-picks Advanced Plus: SPA+, Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland) in three sizes (small, regular, large), were used with versus without AS. ECF during ten cleaning cycles were recorded by a load cell [N].

RESULTS

Using AS leaded to significant lower values for ECF than without (1.04 ± 0.66 N versus 1.97 ± 1.01 N, p < 0.001). In general, a lower ECF was recorded for convex IDR compared to isosceles triangle and concave morphologies (p < 0.001) as well as for gap sizes of 1.3 mm compared to the smaller sizes (p < 0.001). For SPA+ we found significantly higher force values than for SPA (1.67 ± 0.93 N versus 1.31 ± 0.97 N, p < 0.001) independent of the use of AS.

CONCLUSION

Within the study´s in-vitro limitations, we found AS reduced ECF of IRPs by half and allowed using larger diameters interdentally, which could be associated with (1) a higher cleaning effectiveness and (2) a higher acceptance e.g. of patients with dry mouth. This has to be confirmed by further clinical investigations.

摘要

背景

传统的牙间清洁工具如牙线或牙间刷常因操作不便或增加创伤风险而不受欢迎。牙间剔(IRP)则无金属芯且用硅树脂片代替尼龙刷毛,成为另一种选择。然而,体外研究发现,与传统牙间刷相比,IRP 的清洁效果较低,且清洁所需的力更大。本体外研究旨在测量使用含或不含人工唾液(AS;GUM Hydral,Sunstar Suisse SA,Etoy,瑞士)的 IRP 的实验清洁力(ECF)。

方法

该试验装置用于在标准化条件下模拟人类牙齿的 3D 打印牙间区(IDR)(Form 2,Formlabs Sommerville,MA,USA)的清洁情况。使用了三种不同的形态(等腰三角形、凸面、凹面)和三种不同的尺寸(1.0mm、1.1mm、1.3mm)。使用了两种不同尺寸(小、中、大)的 GUM Soft-picks Advanced:SPA 与 GUM Soft-picks Advanced Plus:SPA+(Sunstar Suisse SA,Etoy,瑞士),并分别含或不含 AS。通过测力计[N]记录十次清洁循环过程中的 ECF。

结果

使用 AS 时的 ECF 值明显低于不含 AS 时(1.04±0.66N 比 1.97±1.01N,p<0.001)。一般来说,凸面 IDR 的 ECF 低于等腰三角形和凹面形态(p<0.001),以及 1.3mm 间隙尺寸低于较小尺寸(p<0.001)。对于 SPA+,我们发现其力值明显高于 SPA(1.67±0.93N 比 1.31±0.97N,p<0.001),而与是否使用 AS 无关。

结论

在本研究的体外限制内,我们发现 AS 将 IRP 的 ECF 降低了一半,并允许更大直径的牙间使用,这可能与(1)更高的清洁效果和(2)更高的患者接受度有关,例如口干患者。这需要进一步的临床研究来证实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e2d/9624009/37f68325cff1/12903_2022_2479_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验