首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research : JCDR >Comparison of the Debonding Characteristics of Conventional and New Debonding Instrument used for Ceramic Composite and Metallic Brackets – An Invitro Study
【2h】

Comparison of the Debonding Characteristics of Conventional and New Debonding Instrument used for Ceramic Composite and Metallic Brackets – An Invitro Study

机译:用于陶瓷复合材料和金属支架的传统和新型去粘仪器的去粘特性比较–体外研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: Debonding procedure is time consuming and damaging to the enamel if performed with improper technique. Various debonding methods include: the conventional methods that use pliers or wrenches, an ultrasonic method, electrothermal devices, air pressure impulse devices, diamond burs to grind the brackets off the tooth surface and lasers. Among all these methods, using debonding pliers is most convenient and effective method but has been reported to cause damage to the teeth. Recently, a New Debonding Instrument designed specifically for ceramic and composite brackets has been introduced. As this is a new instrument, little information is available on efficacy of this instrument. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the debonding characteristics of both “the conventional debonding Pliers” and “the New debonding instrument” when removing ceramic, composite and metallic brackets.>Materials and Methods: One Hundred Thirty eight extracted maxillary premolar teeth were collected and divided into two Groups: Group A and Group B (n = 69) respectively. They were further divided into 3 subGroups (n = 23) each according to the types of brackets to be bonded. In subGroups A1 and B1{stainless steel};A2 and B2{ceramic};A3 and B3{composite}adhesive precoated maxillary premolar brackets were used. Among them {ceramic and composite} adhesive pre-coated maxillary premolar brackets were bonded. All the teeth were etched using 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds and the brackets were bonded using Transbond XT primer. Brackets were debonded using Conventional Debonding Plier and New Debonding Instrument (Group B). After debonding, the enamel surface of each tooth was examined under stereo microscope (10X magnifications). Amodifiedadhesive remnant index (ARI) was used to quantify the amount of remaining adhesive on each tooth.>Results: The observations demonstrate that the results of New Debonding Instrument for debonding of metal, ceramic and composite brackets were statistically significantly different (p = 0.04) and superior from the results of conventional debonding Pliers.>Conclusion: The debonding efficiency of New Debonding Instrument is better than the debonding efficiency of Conventional Debonding Pliers for use of metal, ceramic and composite brackets respectively.
机译:>背景:如果使用不当技术,则脱胶过程既耗时又会损坏瓷釉。各种脱胶方法包括:使用钳子或扳手的常规方法,超声方法,电热设备,气压脉冲设备,用于将托齿磨离牙齿表面的金刚石钻和激光。在所有这些方法中,使用去粘钳是最方便,最有效的方法,但据报道会造成牙齿损坏。最近,已经推出了一种专为陶瓷和复合材料托架设计的新型脱胶仪器。由于这是一种新仪器,因此关于该仪器功效的信息很少。这项研究的目的是评估在去除陶瓷,复合材料和金属托架时“常规剥离钳”和“新型剥离钳”的剥离特性。>材料和方法: 138收集拔出的上颌前磨牙,分为两组:A组和B组(n = 69)。根据要绑定的括号的类型,它们进一步分为3个子组(n = 23)。在亚组A1和B1 {不锈钢}; A2和B2 {陶瓷}; A3和B3 {复合}上涂有粘合剂的上颌前磨牙支架。其中{陶瓷和复合}粘合剂预涂层的上颌前磨牙托槽被粘结。所有牙齿均使用37%磷酸蚀刻15秒,并使用Transbond XT底漆粘结托槽。使用传统的脱胶钳和新的脱胶工具(B组)将支架脱胶。脱胶后,在立体显微镜下(放大10倍)检查每个牙齿的釉质表面。 >结果:观察结果表明,用于金属,陶瓷和复合材料托槽剥离的新型剥离工具的结果在统计学上具有显着性差异(p = 0.04)并优于常规去粘钳的结果。>结论:对于金属,陶瓷和复合材料的使用,新型去粘仪器的去粘效率要优于常规去粘钳的去粘效率。括号。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号