Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的比较研究

›› 2019, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (11): 1022-1026.

Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的比较研究

杨茜¹,付梦辰¹,王慧慧¹,乔璐¹,赵玉梅²

1. 同济大学附属口腔医院
2. 同济大学口腔医学院

收稿日期:2019-02-27 修回日期:2019-04-12 出版日期:2019-11-28 发布日期:2019-12-04
通讯作者: 赵玉梅 E-mail:yumeizhao@tongji.edu.cn

Comparative study of Duraphat and Fluor Protector on inhibiting enamel demineralization during fixed orthodontic treatment

Received:2019-02-27 Revised:2019-04-12 Online:2019-11-28 Published:2019-12-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的　使用激光龋齿探测仪，比较两种含氟物Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的临床效果。方法　选取接受直丝弓固定矫治的12-18岁青少年患者60例，其中男性23例，女性37例，平均年龄14.8岁。采用自身对照法，实验组A右上前牙及前磨牙涂布Fluor Protector，实验组B左下前牙及前磨牙涂布Duraphat，对照组A左上前牙及前磨牙不使用任何药物，对照组B右下前牙及前磨牙仅涂布0.9%的氯化钠水溶液。分别于患者粘接正畸托槽之前时、粘接托槽后1个月、粘接托槽后3个月使用DIAG-Noden激光龋齿检测仪测试受试牙牙面并记录数值，应用单因素方差分析比较各组数值是否有统计学差异。结果（1）正畸托槽粘接后1个月、3个月时，2组涂布氟漆的实验组的DD值均低于2组未涂布氟漆的对照组（P<0.05）,说明Duraphat与Fluor Protector两种氟漆均显示了明显抑制釉质脱矿的能力。（2）正畸托槽粘接后1个月、3个月时，涂布Flour Protector的实验组A的DD值与涂布Duraphat的实验组B的DD值间比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），说明两种不同浓度的氟保护漆在抑制牙釉质脱矿的能力方面没有明显优劣。结论　（1）接受固定矫治的患者存在釉质脱矿的易感性。（2）Duraphat与Fluor Protector两种不同浓度的氟化物对于正畸过程中牙釉质的脱矿均有抑制作用，二者抑制脱矿的能力没有明显差异。（3）DIAGNodent激光龋齿检测仪适合临床探查釉质的脱矿及龋损，对釉质表面的改变感应相当敏锐，帮助医师对龋病做出早期诊断，及早监控并采取合适的措施。

关键词: 多乐氟, 氟保护漆, 牙釉质脱矿

Abstract: Objective　 Using the laser cavity detection system DYAGNOdent(DD) to compare the effects of Duraphat and Fluor Protector on inhibition of enamel demineralization after fixed orthodontic appliance during three-months. Methods　In our department, 60 teenagers with straight-wire appliance were enrolled in the study, including 23 males and 37 females, aged 12-18 years with a mean of 14.8 years. This experiment adopted the self-control method. The right upper anterior teeth and premolars were given Duraphat as experimental group A, and the left lower anterior teeth and premolars were given Fluor Protector as experimental group B；The left upper anterior teeth and premolars did not receive any special treatment as control group A, and the right lower anterior teeth and premolars were given normal saline as control group B. Before bonding brackets, and 1 and 3months after bonding brackets, totally 3 times, the degree of enamel demineralization was detected by the laser cavity detection system, DIAGNodent. (DD).One-way ANOVA analysis was used to compare enamel demineralization whether there was statistical significance.Results　 (1)The DD detection values of the two experimental groups were both significantly lower than that of the control groups at 1 and 3months after bonding brackets, indicating that Duraphat and Fluor Protector could inhibit the enamel demineralization(P<0.05). (2)The DD detection values between experimental A and experimental B while 1 and 3months after bonding brackets showed no significantly difference (P>0.05), indicating that there were no significantly difference between the two kinds of fluoride varnish.Conclusions　(1) The patients with fixed orthodontic treatment are susceptible to enamel demineralization.(2) Duraphat and Fluor Protector with two different concentrations could both inhibit enamel demineralization during orthodontics. There is no significant difference between these two groups in inhibiting demineralization.

Key words: Duraphat, Fluoride varnish, Demineralization

中图分类号:

R780.1

杨茜付梦辰王慧慧乔璐赵玉梅. Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的比较研究[J]. , 2019, 39(11): 1022-1026.

参考文献 0

Demito CF, Vivaldi-Rodrigues G, Ramos AL, et al. The efficacy of a fluoride varnish i-n reducing enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets: an in vitro study[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2004,7(4):205-210.[ ] 王弢，张志常，曹顺顺，等. 正畸治疗中GC护牙素与氟保护漆抑制牙釉质脱矿临床效果研究[Ｊ]．中国实用口腔科杂志, 2014,7(6):353-356.[ ] Farhadian N, Miresmaeili A, Eslami B, et al. Effect of fluoride varnish on enamel de-mineralization around brackets: An invivo study[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2008,133(4):95-98．[ ] BOLIS C, HRTLI G P, LENDENMANN U. Fluoride varnishes is there a correlation b-etween fluoride release anddeposition on enamel oral health[J]. Dent, 2015,13(6):545-556.[ ] Ogaard B, Arends J, Helseth CH, et al. Fluride Level in saliva afterbonding orthodonti-c brackets with a fluoride-containing adhesive[J]. Am J Orthod, 1997,111(2):199-202．[ ] MASS JR, JUNIOR IM, LODIC S, et al. Differences in loosely bound fluoride format-ion and anticaries effect of resin-based fluoride varnishes[J]. Int J Paediatr Dent, 2013,23(3):166-172.[ ] 林居红,王金华,杨刚,等．不同浓度氟保护漆抑制人牙釉质脱矿能力的体外研究[J]. 重庆医科大学学报, 2005,30(3):429-431.[ ] CARVALHO T S, PETERS B G, RIOS D，et al. Fluoridevarnish with calcium glycero-phosphate: fluoride release and effect on in vitro enamel demineralization[J]. Braz OralRes, 2015;29(1):1-6.[ ] Meadow J, Kraut M, Guarnieri M, et al. Asymptomatic Chiari Type 1malformations id-entified on magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Meursurg, 2000;92(6):920-926.[ ] Shen C, Autio-Gold J. Assessing fluoride concentration uniformity and fluoride release from three varnishes[J]. J Am Dent Assoc, 2002;133(2):176-182.[ ] 盛江筠,刘正. 变形链球菌(MS)耐氟菌株的诱导及产酸性的实验研究[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2000,35(2):9.[ ] 罗虹艺，邵平. 氟保护漆、矿化液低、浓度氟化物再矿化作用比较[J]. 牡丹江医学院学报, 2006,27(3):72-73.

[1]	王荣艳吴祥冰高桂林龚中坚於俊朱金晓. 正畸固定矫治牙釉质脱矿的危险因素分析[J]. , 2017, 37(8): 703-706.
[2]	段君兰刘宗响张洪永韩爱军王鹏来. 氟保护漆联合窝沟封闭对第一恒磨牙防龋的效果评估[J]. , 2017, 37(7): 629-631.
[3]	宋珏曹新明吴振刚刘艳瞿红霞王珏曾晓莉陈栋. 氟化钠护齿剂在预防上海市学龄前儿童龋齿中的效果评价[J]. , 2017, 37(10): 925-928.
[4]	蔡蔚高祯王奕霍东婷. 窝沟封闭和氟保护漆预防学生恒牙龋的疗效观察[J]. , 2016, 36(11): 1037-1039.
[5]	郭标新,王君香；阎燕；赵奇. GC护牙素在预防正畸釉质脱矿中的应用研究[J]. , 2010, 30(03): 184-185.
[6]	宋卫健,张均,安钢. 苏州市7～14岁学生口腔健康综合干预疗效分析[J]. , 2009, 29(11): 601-603.
[7]	黄玮;朱洪水. 氟保护漆预防龋齿的研究[J]. , 2008, 28(9): 492-493.
[8]	茅海东,朱建新. 氟保护漆预防老年人根面龋的临床观察[J]. , 2008, 28(5): 235-236.
[9]	朱斌;刘正彤;张利平;俞辰斌. Fluodica用于牙本质过敏143例临床疗效观察[J]. , 2006, 26(4): 311-312.
[10]	张晓燕. 氟保护漆在正畸防脱矿中的应用研究[J]. , 2003, 23(3): 155-156.
[11]	曾志平,董显进. 固定矫治术后牙釉质脱矿及其防范措施的临床研究[J]. , 2002, 22(01): 40-42.