Suppr超能文献

两种间接正畸粘结方式的剪切粘结强度

Shear bond strength in two types of indirect orthodontic cementation.

作者信息

Munive-Mendez Arnaldo-Alfredo, Morales-Vadillo Rafael, Guevara-Canales Janet-Ofelia

机构信息

Faculty of Dentistry, "Universidad de San Martín de Porres", Lima - Peru.

出版信息

J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Aug 1;16(8):e953-e960. doi: 10.4317/jced.61800. eCollection 2024 Aug.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To compare the shear bond strength of brackets cemented to dental enamel according to the cementation techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Experimental study. We used 90 premolars and placed them in printed polylactic acid (PLA) filament models to simulate the dental arch shape and to then cement brackets using the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem®. Then, we carried out a shear bond strength test using a universal testing machine, and we evaluated the enamel surface using the adhesive resin remaining index. Dunn's test was used for the inferential statistical analysis of shear bond strength, and Fisher's exact test was used for the adhesive resin remaining index.

RESULTS

The shear bond strength of the brackets recorded mean values of 16.74±4.48Mpa, 15.93±6.49Mpa and 12.09±5.07Mpa in the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem® respectively. At an inferential level, a lower statistically significant difference was found in the indirect group with OrthoCem® in contrast to the other two groups. In the evaluation of resin remaining after detachment, the direct technique group registered 46.7% of teeth with more than half of resin remaining and the indirect technique groups with Transbond™XT and Orthocem® registered less than half of resin remaining with an incidence of 53.3% and 43.3% respectively. At an inferential level, a statistically significant difference between groups was evidenced.

CONCLUSIONS

The indirect cementation technique using Transbond™ XT is more recommended since it presents a higher shear bond strength than using Orthocem®. Orthodontics, Adhesion, orthodontic adhesives, shear bond strength.

摘要

背景

根据粘结技术比较粘结在牙釉质上的托槽的剪切粘结强度。

材料与方法

实验研究。我们使用了90颗前磨牙,并将它们放置在打印的聚乳酸(PLA)细丝模型中以模拟牙弓形状,然后使用Transbond™XT直接粘结技术、间接粘结技术以及使用Orthocem®的间接粘结技术粘结托槽。然后,我们使用万能试验机进行了剪切粘结强度测试,并使用粘结树脂残留指数评估牙釉质表面。Dunn检验用于剪切粘结强度的推断性统计分析,Fisher精确检验用于粘结树脂残留指数。

结果

托槽的剪切粘结强度在使用Transbond™XT直接粘结技术、间接粘结技术以及使用Orthocem®的间接粘结技术下记录的平均值分别为16.74±4.48Mpa、15.93±6.49Mpa和12.09±5.07Mpa。在推断水平上,与其他两组相比,使用Orthocem®的间接粘结组存在较低的统计学显著差异。在评估脱粘后树脂残留情况时,直接粘结技术组有46.7%的牙齿树脂残留超过一半,而使用Transbond™XT和Orthocem®的间接粘结技术组树脂残留少于一半,发生率分别为53.3%和43.3%。在推断水平上,组间存在统计学显著差异。

结论

更推荐使用Transbond™ XT的间接粘结技术,因为它比使用Orthocem®具有更高的剪切粘结强度。正畸学、粘结、正畸粘结剂、剪切粘结强度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e04/11392446/c04a2ae1a4e6/jced-16-e953-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验