Martha Krisztina, Kis Esztella-Éva, Mureșan Izabella Éva, Ioanovici Andrei Constantin
Faculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Târgu Mures, 38 Gh. Marinescu Str., 540139 Târgu Mureș, Romania.
Faculty of Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Târgu Mures, 38 Gh. Marinescu Str., 540139 Târgu Mureș, Romania.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 May 7;61(5):858. doi: 10.3390/medicina61050858.
: The most common method for treating malocclusions today is fixed orthodontic therapy, during which brackets and tubes are bonded to the surface of the teeth, which makes oral hygiene difficult to maintain. Increased plaque retention, gingival bleeding, and gingivitis can be diagnosed in the early phases of treatment. The periodontal response to plaque accumulation can be explained by quantitative and qualitative changes in the subgingival microbiota. The aim of our research was to investigate the changes in the subgingival microbiota that occurred within 6-8 weeks after bonding when two different orthodontic adhesives were used. : Thirty patients were followed; molar tubes were bonded with a composite (C) in fifteen cases, and in the other fifteen cases, they were bonded with glass ionomer cementum (GIC). A microbiological sample was taken from the gingival sulcus of the maxillary first molars at the time of appliance placement (T1) and 6-8 weeks (T2) after bonding. Bacterial DNA detection was performed using the micro-IDentplus11 (Hain Lifescience GmbH, Germany) PCR (polymerase chain reaction) method. The statistical analysis included McNemar's test to analyze the paired binary data and Fisher's Exact Test to compare the prevalence of each of the 11 bacteria at T1 and, ultimately, T2 between the two studied groups. The Bonferroni correction was also applied. : When analyzing GIC vs. C at T1 and T2, none of the studied pathogens showed significant differences. : Given the lack of statistical significance, these trends do not confirm a definitive impact of the procedure on bacterial presence. The increased presence of periodontal pathogens might suggest that bonding does not reduce the bacterial loading of subgingival microbiota. Less protective effects of the GIC intervention against and bacteria were detected.
如今治疗错牙合畸形最常见的方法是固定正畸治疗,在此过程中,托槽和矫治管会粘结在牙齿表面,这使得口腔卫生难以维持。在治疗早期可诊断出菌斑滞留增加、牙龈出血和牙龈炎。牙周对菌斑堆积的反应可通过龈下微生物群的数量和质量变化来解释。我们研究的目的是调查使用两种不同正畸粘结剂粘结后6 - 8周内龈下微生物群的变化。
对30名患者进行了跟踪研究;15例患者的磨牙矫治管用复合材料(C)粘结,另外15例患者的磨牙矫治管用玻璃离子水门汀(GIC)粘结。在装置放置时(T1)以及粘结后6 - 8周(T2),从右上颌第一磨牙的龈沟采集微生物样本。使用micro-IDentplus11(德国海因生命科学有限公司)聚合酶链反应(PCR)方法进行细菌DNA检测。统计分析包括用于分析配对二元数据的McNemar检验以及用于比较两个研究组在T1以及最终在T2时11种细菌各自患病率的Fisher精确检验。还应用了Bonferroni校正。
在分析T1和T2时的GIC与C时,所研究的病原体均未显示出显著差异。
鉴于缺乏统计学意义,这些趋势并未证实该操作对细菌存在有明确影响。牙周病原体数量增加可能表明粘结并未降低龈下微生物群的细菌负荷。检测到GIC干预对某些细菌的保护作用较小。