Martinez Mallaury, Fawaz Paul, El Sayegh Patrick, Rapin Christophe, Vande Vannet Bart
Department of Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Faculty of Odontology, University of Lorraine, 54000 Nancy, France.
CHRU (Regional University Hospital Center De Nancy), 54000 Nancy, France.
Dent J (Basel). 2025 Jun 23;13(7):285. doi: 10.3390/dj13070285.
The aim of this study was to compare the hardness, chemical composition, and microstructure of various self-ligating ceramic orthodontic brackets and enamel. Sixty ceramic brackets (0.022″ × 0.028″) from six different orthodontic firms (Damon Clear 2, Genius Crystal, Empower 2 Clear, Clarity Ultra, Alpine SL Clear, and Experience Ceramic) were tested using a microhardness tester and a scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). The hardness of the ceramic brackets ranged from 1969.8 to 2567.3 VH. The statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests revealed significant differences in microhardness between most of the ceramic brackets. Additionally, this study found that passive self-ligating brackets exhibited a significantly higher hardness than that of active self-ligating brackets ( = 0.01). The SEM analysis showed that the variations in the oxygen and alumina composition between the six bracket types were also statistically significant ( = 0.01). Among all of the ceramic brackets tested, Alpine brackets displayed the lowest hardness values, making them a potential choice for minimizing enamel damage. Notably, the hardness of self-ligating ceramic brackets was found to be at least six times greater than that of enamel, raising concerns about their potential to cause trauma to the enamel of antagonistic teeth. Consequently, the researchers recommend avoiding bonding ceramic brackets to the mandibular teeth or elevating occlusion with turbo-bites to prevent traumatic contact during treatment.
本研究的目的是比较各种自锁陶瓷正畸托槽与牙釉质的硬度、化学成分和微观结构。使用显微硬度测试仪和配备能谱仪（EDS）的扫描电子显微镜（SEM）对来自六家不同正畸公司（Damon Clear 2、Genius Crystal、Empower 2 Clear、Clarity Ultra、Alpine SL Clear和Experience Ceramic）的60个陶瓷托槽（0.022″×0.028″）进行了测试。陶瓷托槽的硬度范围为1969.8至2567.3维氏硬度。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Mann-Whitney检验进行的统计分析表明，大多数陶瓷托槽之间的显微硬度存在显著差异。此外，本研究发现被动自锁托槽的硬度明显高于主动自锁托槽（P = 0.01）。SEM分析表明，六种托槽类型之间的氧和氧化铝成分差异也具有统计学意义（P = 0.01）。在所有测试的陶瓷托槽中，Alpine托槽的硬度值最低，这使其成为使牙釉质损伤最小化的潜在选择。值得注意的是，发现自锁陶瓷托槽的硬度至少是牙釉质的六倍，这引发了人们对其可能对拮抗牙牙釉质造成创伤的担忧。因此，研究人员建议避免将陶瓷托槽粘结在下颌牙齿上，或使用涡轮咬垫抬高咬合，以防止治疗期间的创伤性接触。
