Becker A, Shpack N, Shteyer A
Department of Orthodontics, Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Dental Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel.
Eur J Orthod. 1996 Oct;18(5):457-63. doi: 10.1093/ejo/18.5.457.
This study examines the relative success of bonding an attachment to an impacted tooth at the time of surgical exposure, compared with placing it on a subsequent occasion. In addition, the relative merits of various attachments, the choice of bonding site and whether or not pumice prophylaxis is necessary, were tested. The results showed that bonding at the time of exposure is superior to its performance at a later date, that the use of an eyelet attachment has a lower failure rate than the use of a conventional bracket, that the palatal aspect offers the poorest bonding surface and that pumicing the exposed tooth offers no advantage over immediate etching of the exposed enamel. The results of this study refute the view that the circumstances prevalent at the time of surgical exposure are not conducive to the reliable bonding of an attachment to an impacted tooth.
本研究考察了在外科暴露时将附件粘结到阻生牙上与在随后的时机进行粘结相比的相对成功率。此外，还测试了各种附件的相对优点、粘结部位的选择以及是否有必要进行浮石清洁预防。结果表明，暴露时粘结优于后期粘结；使用小孔附件的失败率低于使用传统托槽；腭侧提供的粘结表面最差；对暴露的牙齿进行浮石清洁预防并不比立即蚀刻暴露的牙釉质更具优势。本研究结果反驳了外科暴露时的普遍情况不利于将附件可靠粘结到阻生牙上的观点。
