首页> 外文期刊>Clinical oral investigations >Self-etch adhesives for the bonding of orthodontic brackets: Faster, stronger, safer?
【24h】

Self-etch adhesives for the bonding of orthodontic brackets: Faster, stronger, safer?

机译:用于正畸托槽粘接的自蚀刻胶粘剂:更快,更坚固,更安全?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of accelerating procedures for bonding of orthodontic brackets in vitro by comparing different adhesives (etch-and-rinse, self-etch) and polymerization procedures (curing devices, time). The performance was characterized by three parameters: (1) the bond strength achieved, (2) the incidence of enamel damage, and (3) the extent of residual composite on the tooth. Materials and methods: Bracket bonding was performed on 500 extracted human teeth after application of either an etch-and-rinse adhesive or a one-step self-etch adhesive. Two different two-component self-etch adhesives (Clearfil SE and Transbond Plus) and two single-component self-etch adhesives (Ideal and iBond) were investigated after using different polymerization procedures (light-emitting diode for 10 or 20 s or plasma arc curing device for 3 or 6 s). The bond strength, incidence of enamel damage, and extent of residual composite on the tooth were measured. Results: Single-component self-etch adhesives gave the lowest bond strengths. No significant difference in bond strength could be detected between the two-component self-etch adhesives and the etch-and-rinse method. There was a 70.3 % risk for enamel damage at bond strengths above 12 MPa, but only 5 % risk below 12 MPa and no risk below 8.2 MPa. The risk of enamel damage increased by an odds ratio increment of 1.3 for each additional MPa above 8.2 MPa. Conclusion: Single-component self-etch adhesives showed the lowest bond strengths, caused limited enamel damage, and generally left less residual composite on the tooth. Clinical relevance: The nature of the adhesive greatly influences the resultant bond strength, the risk of enamel damage, and the extent of residual composite on the teeth.
机译:目的:本研究旨在通过比较不同的胶粘剂(蚀刻和冲洗,自蚀刻)和聚合程序(固化装置,时间)来评估加速矫正支架在体外粘合的性能。该性能由三个参数表征:(1)达到的粘结强度;(2)牙釉质损坏的发生率;(3)牙齿上残留复合物的程度。材料和方法:在使用蚀刻漂洗粘合剂或一步式自蚀刻粘合剂后,对500个拔出的人类牙齿进行了支架粘结。在使用不同的聚合程序(发光二极管10或20 s或等离子弧)之后,研究了两种不同的两组分自蚀刻胶粘剂(Clearfil SE和Transbond Plus)和两种单组分自蚀刻胶粘剂(理想和iBond)。固化装置3或6 s)。测量粘结强度,牙釉质损伤的发生率以及牙齿上残留的复合物的程度。结果:单组分自蚀刻胶粘剂具有最低的粘结强度。在两组分自蚀刻胶粘剂和蚀刻漂洗方法之间,粘结强度没有明显差异。当粘结强度高于12 MPa时,瓷釉损坏的风险为70.3%,但低于12 MPa时只有5%的风险,而低于8.2 MPa时则没有风险。 8.2 MPa以上每增加MPa,搪瓷损坏的风险就会以1.3的优势比增加。结论:单组份自蚀刻胶粘剂显示出最低的粘结强度,对牙釉质的损害有限,并且在牙齿上残留的复合物较少。临床意义:粘合剂的性质极大地影响所得的粘合强度,牙釉质损坏的风险以及牙齿上残留的复合物的程度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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