不同条件下3种正畸粘接剂粘结强度的比较及其意义

doi:10.13481/j.1671-587x.20160318

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 探讨正畸临床常用的3种粘接剂在干燥和人工唾液条件下对金属托槽的粘结强度,评价其粘接性能,为临床应用提供参考。方法: 收集60颗因正畸治疗拔除的前磨牙,随机分为3M光固化粘接剂组、3M化学固化粘接剂组和杭州西湖牙釉质粘接剂组,每组20颗,每组分为2个亚组,每组10颗。A1组为干燥条件+金属托槽+3M光固化粘接剂,A2组为人工唾液条件+金属托槽+3M光固化粘接剂,B1组为干燥条件+金属托槽+3M化学固化粘接剂,B2组为人工唾液条件+金属托槽+3M化学固化粘接剂,C1组为干燥条件+金属托槽+杭州西湖粘接剂,C2组为人工唾液条件+金属托槽+杭州西湖粘接剂。采用电子万能力学实验机测定各组粘接剂与金属托槽在干燥及人工唾液条件下的抗剪切强度;显微镜下观察粘接金属托槽的离体牙表面粘接剂残留指数(ARI);扫描电镜观察去除金属托槽后离体牙牙釉质表面形态表现。结果: 在干燥和人工唾液条件下,3M光固化粘接剂组粘接剂的抗剪切强度高于3M化学固化粘接剂组(P>0.05)和杭州西湖粘接剂组(P<0.05)。在干燥条件下,3M化学固化组粘接剂的抗剪切强度高于人工唾液条件(P<0.05)。在人工唾液环境下,3种粘接剂的抗剪切强度比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。3M光固化粘接剂组离体牙的ARI均低于其他2组。扫描电镜下,3M光固化粘接剂组离体牙牙釉质表面较其他组规则且平坦,无明显裂痕和釉质剥脱。结论: 在干燥和人工唾液条件下,3种粘接剂的粘接强度均能达到正畸临床要求,其中3M光固化粘接剂的粘接性能优于其他2种粘接剂。

关键词: 正畸粘接剂, 粘结性能, 扫描电镜, 金属托槽, 粘接强度

Abstract:

Objective: To discuss the bonding strengths of commonly used three kinds of orthodontic adhesives under the dry and artificial saliva conditions,and to evaluate their bonding properties and provide the reference for clinical application. Methods: A total of 60 premolars removed for the orthodontic treatment were collected and randomly divided into 3M light curing adhesive group,3M chemical curing adhesive group, and Hangzhou West Lake enamel adhesive group,and there were 20 premolars in each group;then the each group was divided into two sub-groups with 10 premolars.A1 group was dry condition + metal brackets + 3M light curing adhesive,and A2 group was artificial saliva condition + metal brackets + 3M light curing adhesive; B1 group was dry condition + metal brackets + 3M chemical curing adhesive,and B2 group was artificial saliva condition+metal brackets + 3M chemical curing adhesive;C1 group was dry condition + metal + Hangzhou West Lake enamel adhesive,and C2 group was artificial saliva condition + metal brackets+ Hangzhou West Lake enamel adhesive.The electronic universal mechanical testing machine was uesd to test the bond strengths of orthodontic adhesives in various groups under the dry or artificial saliva conditions. The microscope was used to observe the adhesive remnant index(ARI) of orthodontic adhesives on the surface of the teeth, which was bonded with metal brackets;the scanning electron microscope was used to observe the surface morphology of the teeth detached from metal brackets. Results: Under both dry and artificial saliva conditions,the bonding strength of orthodontic adhesives in 3M light curing adhesive group was higher than those in 3M chemical curing adhesive and Hangzhou West Lake enamel adhesive groups(P<0.05); the bonding strength of orthodontic adhesives in 3M light curing adhesive group under the dry condition was higher than that under artificial saliva condition. Under the saliva condition, the bonding strengths of orthodontic adhesives in varous groups had no significant differences(P>0.05);the ARI of premolars in 3M light curing adhesive group was lower than those in other two groups(P<0.05).The testing results of scanning electron microscope showed that compared with the other two groups,the surface of premolars in 3M light curing adhesive group was more regular and flat without obvious cracks and enamel stripping. Conclusion: Under different conditions,the bonding strengths of three kinds of orthodontic adhesives can meet the requirements of clinical orthodontics,and the bonding properties of orthodontic adhesives of 3M light curing adhesive is better than the other two kinds of orthodontic adhesives.

Key words: orthodontic adhesives, bonding properties, scanning electron microscope, metal brackets, bonding strength

中图分类号:

R783.5

牟胤赫, 杨陆一, 吴嫣然, 滕蓉, 夏小雪, 宁磊, 王守东. 不同条件下3种正畸粘接剂粘结强度的比较及其意义[J]. 吉林大学学报(医学版), 2016, 42(03): 512-516.

MOU Yinhe, YANG Luyi, WU Yanran, TENG Rong, XIA Xiaoxue, NING Lei, WANG Shoudong. Comparison among bonding strenghs of three kinds of orthodontic adhesives under different conditions and their significances[J]. Journal of Jilin University Medicine Edition, 2016, 42(03): 512-516.

参考文献

[1] Wenderoth CJ, Weinstein M, Borislow AJ. Effectiveness of a fluoride-releasing sealant in reducing decalcification during orthodontic treatment[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,1999,116(6):629-634.

[2] Oztǜrk B, Malko S, Koyutǜrk AE, et al.Influence of different tooth types on the bond strength of two orthodontic adhesive systems[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2008,30(4): 407-412.

[3] 房伯君,马丽,杨亚囡.不同粘接剂重复粘接正畸托槽的剪切强度研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志, 2004,22(5):434-435.

[4] Whitlock BO, Eick JD, Ackerman RJJr, et al.Shear strength of ceramic brackets bonded to porcelain[J].Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,1994,106(4):358-364.

[5] 陈启林,李娟,严燕,等.不同粘接材料及表面处理方法对瓷与托槽粘结强度的影响[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2015,31(1):6-9.

[6] 陈治清, 管利民. 口腔粘接学[M]. 北京:北京医科大学·中国协和医科大学联合出版社,1993:40-41.

[7] Fox NA,McCabe JF,Buckley JG.A Critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics[J].Br J Orthod, 1994,21(1):33-34 .

[8] 冯良,杨士杰,陈萍,等.不同污染情况在口腔正畸托粘接剂剪切强度方面的影响力观察[J].河北医药,2016,38(3):387-389.

[9] 李立营,彭佳,武冠英,等.两种不同类型粘接剂和临床四手操作在正畸托槽粘结过程中的应用效果评价[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2014,30(3):185-187.

[10] 王晓丹,刘晓. 比较3种正畸粘合剂的临床效果[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2013,29(5):743-745.

[11] 赖颖真,丘雨蓓,林珊.固化光源对正畸托槽光敏粘结剂抗剪切强度及粘结剂残留指数影响的研究[J].口腔医学研究,2012,28(3):268-271.

[12] 葛康康,曲虹,谭军,等.2种不同底板结构及粘结剂对托槽粘结强度的影响[J].口腔医学研究,2012,28(12):1231-1238.

[13] Movahhed HZ, Ogaard B, Syverud M. An in vitro comparison of the shear bond strength of a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and a composite adhesive for bonding orthodontic brackets[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2005,27(5):477-483.

[14] Crandhi PK, Combe EC. Speidel TM. Shear bond strength o f stainless steel orthodontic brackets with a moisture insensitive primer[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2001,119(3):251-255.

[15] 李正明,刘新强,陈杰,等.3种酸蚀、粘接方法粘接托槽后釉质粘接剂界面的超微形态观察[J]. 广东牙病防治,2012,20(7):348-351.

[16] 欧平花,厉松.口腔正畸光固化粘接剂研究及应用进展[J].北京口腔医学,2009,17(4):238-240.