Zelos L, Bevis R R, Keenan K M
University of Minnesota, Department of Orthodontics, Minneapolis.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994 Jul;106(1):10-21. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70016-8.
The purpose of this study was to investigate bond strength for ceramic orthodontic brackets bonded to dental porcelain. The following factors were tested. Two types of ceramic brackets were placed on two different types of porcelain surfaces with two different bonding systems. Three different debonding techniques, and various composite removal techniques and surface restoration techniques were used. Two hundred porcelain samples were used that duplicated the labial surface of a maxillary right central incisor. Bond strengths were measured with an Instron Universal testing machine (Instron Corp., Canton, Mass.). Mean bond strength and standard deviations were calculated and significance was determined with analyses of variance (ANOVA) and a chi-square test. Composite removal and polishing methods were investigated by scanning electron microscopy. The results showed that tensile type debonding methods are the least likely to damage the porcelain surface. Some brackets (Unitek Corp., Minn.) having a higher bond strength (p < or = 0.01) fractured the porcelain surface when tested in the shear debonding mode. The bonding materials tested were comparable to adhesion studies of similar brackets to enamel. The Ormco primer-Concise porcelain bonding system was significantly stronger (p < or = 0.01) than the Scotchprime-Transbond. Composite removal by careful use of a carbide bur, followed by the use of the Shofu porcelain adjustment kit and porcelain glaze polish, restored the finish to a normal porcelain surface after debonding. The study showed that shear and tensile debonding forces for glazed porcelain with the use of silane primer, were comparable with those reported in the literature for enamel, thus clinically sufficient. At the same time, preservation of the glaze allowed an almost ideal polishing of the porcelain surface after debonding.
本研究的目的是调查陶瓷正畸托槽与牙科烤瓷粘结的粘结强度。测试了以下因素。将两种类型的陶瓷托槽放置在两种不同类型的烤瓷表面上，使用两种不同的粘结系统。采用三种不同的脱粘技术，以及各种复合树脂去除技术和表面修复技术。使用了200个复制上颌右侧中切牙唇面的烤瓷样本。用英斯特朗万能材料试验机（英斯特朗公司，马萨诸塞州坎顿）测量粘结强度。计算平均粘结强度和标准差，并通过方差分析（ANOVA）和卡方检验确定显著性。通过扫描电子显微镜研究复合树脂去除和抛光方法。结果表明，拉伸型脱粘方法最不可能损坏烤瓷表面。一些粘结强度较高（p≤0.01）的托槽（Unitek公司，明尼苏达州）在剪切脱粘模式测试时使烤瓷表面破裂。所测试的粘结材料与类似托槽与牙釉质的粘结研究结果相当。奥姆科底漆 - 简洁烤瓷粘结系统明显比思高粘结剂 - 特邦更强（p≤0.01）。小心使用硬质合金车针去除复合树脂，随后使用松风烤瓷调整套件和烤瓷釉抛光，脱粘后可将表面恢复到正常烤瓷表面。研究表明，使用硅烷底漆时，烤瓷表面的剪切和拉伸脱粘力与文献中报道的牙釉质的脱粘力相当，因此在临床上是足够的。同时，保留釉质使得脱粘后烤瓷表面几乎能达到理想的抛光效果。
