摘要
目的寻找一种在临床正畸中可干净去除牙残留的粘结剂,并且对牙釉质损伤小且可获得较理想二次粘结强度的牙面处理方法。方法将上颌第一前磨牙150颗,随机分为五组,对照组为首次粘结组,其余4组分别为金刚砂车针组、矽粒子组、粘结剂去除钳组和超声洁治喷砂组。测定各组托槽粘结强度,并在扫描电镜下观察不同牙面处理后的釉质形貌,记录粘结剂残留指数(ARI)及釉质表面指数(ESI)。应用SPSS统计学软件处理分析各实验数值。结果金刚砂组18.32 Pa、粘结剂去除钳组16.50 Pa、超声喷砂组17.11 Pa的抗剪切强度均明显大于首次粘结组的14.72 Pa、矽粒子组14.73 Pa、与首次粘结组的数值接近,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);ESI计分金刚砂组较矽粒子组分值最高为28分;ARI计分,去除钳组34分>金刚砂组23分>矽粒子组29分>超声喷砂组24分。结论托槽二次粘结强度需满足临床需求。金刚砂车针组容易造成釉质表面损伤,残余粘结剂清除干净;而矽粒子组在釉质上可仅产生很细的划痕,能较好的保护牙釉质。
Objective To find an optimum means which damaged enamel least, and got the strongest RBS. Methods The maxillary first premolar 150 teeth, were randomly divided into for groups of five, first bonding groups as control group, the other 4 groups respectively with high speed handpiece emery car acupuncture group, with slow speed handpiece of silicone particle group, binder removal forceps group and ultrasonic scaling sandblasting group. Each bracket bonding strength, determination of different treatment of teeth surface were observed under scanning electron microscope after the enamel morphology, recording, ARI and ESI count. The experimental values of the experimental groups were analyzed by SPSS statistical software.. Results The shear strength of 18.32Pa, 16.50Pa, and 17.11Pa in the 14.72Pa group was significantly higher than that in the first group, and the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）; the ESI score was 28 points; the ARI＇ score was 23. Conclusion It is necessary for secondary shear bond strength. To damage the enamel easily by using dia-bur to polish remnant resin least, and using silicon particles can protect enamel.
出处
《全科口腔医学电子杂志》
2015年第7期81-84,共4页
Electronic Journal of General Stomatology
