Rajan Anjali V, Parameswaran Ratna, Khan Nayeemullah, Balaguru Sumitra
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Jan 18;16(1):e52537. doi: 10.7759/cureus.52537. eCollection 2024 Jan.
Background Microleakage under orthodontic brackets has a role in early bracket debonding and white spot lesions due to the ingress of oral fluids in the bracket-adhesive-tooth interface. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate and compare the microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with the conventional adhesive system, nanocomposites, and nanoionomers. Materials and methods Forty-five human premolars were extracted for therapeutic reasons and collected for this study. Teeth were randomly assigned to three groups: Group A: conventional etching with conventional adhesive, Group B: conventional etching with nanocomposite, and Group C: conventional etching with nanoionomer. Stainless steel premolar brackets were used for bonding. After thermocycling, the extracted teeth were submerged in a 0.5% solution of basic fuchsine for 24 hours. They were then cut longitudinally. A stereomicroscope was used to assess microleakage along the occlusal and gingival interfaces. Results To compare the microleakage scores between gingival and occlusal aspects within each group, the student's t-test was performed. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the post-hoc Tukey test were applied to the data for intergroup comparison of microleakage scores. On comparing the microleakage scores, the gingival side of interfaces depicted higher microleakage than the occlusal side gingival side across all groups, demonstrating statistically significant results (P <0.05).On intergroup comparison, the occlusal bracket adhesive interface and gingival tooth adhesive interface revealed significantly higher microleakage values for Group B followed by Group C with Group A the least. However, there was no significant difference in the microleakage scores between Group B and Group C on intergroup comparison of mean microleakage scores (P <0.05). Conclusion The gingival side showed higher microleakage scores than the occlusal side. Nanoionomers showed microleakage values higher than the Transbond XT but lower than nanocomposites. Based on the results of the present study, in terms of microleakage, Transbond XT demonstrated lower microleakage when compared to nanoionomers and nanocomposites.
正畸托槽下的微渗漏在早期托槽脱粘和白斑病变中起作用,这是由于口腔液体进入托槽 - 粘合剂 - 牙齿界面所致。本体外研究旨在评估和比较用传统粘合剂系统、纳米复合材料和纳米离子体粘结的正畸托槽下的微渗漏情况。
因治疗原因拔除45颗人类前磨牙并收集用于本研究。牙齿随机分为三组:A组:用传统粘合剂进行传统酸蚀;B组:用纳米复合材料进行传统酸蚀;C组:用纳米离子体进行传统酸蚀。使用不锈钢前磨牙托槽进行粘结。热循环后,将拔除的牙齿浸泡在0.5%的碱性品红溶液中24小时。然后纵向切割。使用体视显微镜评估沿咬合面和牙龈界面的微渗漏情况。
为比较每组内牙龈面和咬合面的微渗漏评分,进行了学生t检验。对微渗漏评分数据应用方差分析(ANOVA)和事后Tukey检验进行组间比较。比较微渗漏评分时,所有组中界面的牙龈侧微渗漏均高于咬合侧牙龈侧,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。组间比较时,咬合托槽粘合剂界面和牙龈牙齿粘合剂界面显示,B组的微渗漏值显著更高,其次是C组,A组最低。然而,在平均微渗漏评分的组间比较中,B组和C组的微渗漏评分无显著差异(P<0.05)。
牙龈侧的微渗漏评分高于咬合侧。纳米离子体的微渗漏值高于Transbond XT但低于纳米复合材料。根据本研究结果,就微渗漏而言,与纳米离子体和纳米复合材料相比,Transbond XT表现出较低的微渗漏。