Suppr超能文献

正畸去粘接的最安全方法是什么——文献系统评价。

What is the safest method of orthodontic debonding - a systematic review of the literature.

机构信息

Department of Prosthodontics and Orthodontics, Dental Institute, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.

25th Military Clinical Hospital with Policlinic, Orthodontic Clinic, Kraków, Poland.

出版信息

Folia Med Cracov. 2023 Oct 30;63(3):133-156. doi: 10.24425/fmc.2023.147219.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to review the current knowledge based on in vitro and in vivo studies, that evaluated the enamel damage connected with removal of metal and ceramic orthodontic brackets taking into account different debonding methods. Brackets fracture was also assessed. The protocol for this study was constructed according to the PRISMA statement. The literature review was performed in MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases in May 2021. The searching was repeated in Journal of Stomatology, Orthodontic Forum and grey literature was screened using Google Scholar. Out of eligible studies 207 were screened by title and abstract, 85 subjected to full-text analysis and 30 were qualified for the research. The prevalence of enamel fracture ranged from 0 to 94.4%. The results of our review do not allow to identify the manual method of debonding that minimizes the risk of enamel damage. Thermal method and laser irradiation reduce the risk of enamel fracture.

摘要

本研究的目的是回顾基于体外和体内研究的现有知识,评估考虑不同去粘接方法的金属和陶瓷正畸托槽去除与牙釉质损伤的关系,同时也评估了托槽的断裂。本研究的方案是根据 PRISMA 声明制定的。文献检索于 2021 年 5 月在 MEDLINE 下的 PubMed、Cochrane 和 Scopus 数据库中进行,之后在《口腔医学杂志》、《正畸论坛》中重复检索,并使用 Google Scholar 筛查灰色文献。在符合条件的研究中,有 207 项通过标题和摘要进行筛选,85 项进行全文分析,30 项符合研究要求。牙釉质裂的发生率从 0 到 94.4%不等。我们的综述结果无法确定哪种手动去粘接方法能将牙釉质损伤的风险降至最低。热法和激光照射可降低牙釉质断裂的风险。

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