不同粘接剂去除方式对釉质微观结构及托槽抗剪切粘接强度的影响

doi:10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2022.09.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的对比研究5种不同牙面残留粘接剂去除方式对釉质及托槽抗剪切粘接强度(shear bond strength,SBS)的影响。方法选取66颗离体前磨牙,随机分为6组。A组:空白组,牙面不做任何处理;B组:金刚砂车针处理组;C组:绿砂石处理组;D组:慢速钨钢钻处理组;E组:慢速钨钢钻+抛光杯处理组;F组:慢速钨钢钻+硅粒子处理组,用上述处理方法对各组等量粘接剂样本进行磨除,记录操作时间,分别用扫描电镜和表面粗糙度仪对釉质表面进行定性和定量评价。各组处理样本粘接金属托槽后,应用万能力学测试仪检测各组托槽SBS,分析牙面粘接剂残留指数(adhesive residual index,ARI)。结果 B、C组去除效率较高,E组效率最低;扫描电镜显示F组处理后的釉质形态最接近正常牙釉质;F组表面粗糙度最低((0.48±0.13)μm),与A组无统计学差异(P＞0.05);D组托槽再粘接强度最高((16.61±1.99)MPa),明显高于A组(P<0.05);各组托槽去除后的ARI指数无显著性差异(P＞0.05)。结论金刚砂车针及绿砂石去除效率较高,但对釉质损伤较大;慢速钨钢钻配合硅粒子抛光后对釉质的损伤最低,且去除效率在可接受范围;直接慢速钨钢钻处理后的牙面托槽SBS最高。

关键词: 粘接剂去除方式, 牙表面粗糙度, 抗剪切粘接强度

Abstract: Objective To compare the effects of five different removal methods of residual adhesive on enamel and brackets′ shear bond strength(SBS). Methods Sixty-six isolated premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups. Group A:blank group; Group B:diamondbur; Group C:green sandstone; Group D:slow tungsten carbide bur; Group E:slow tungsten carbide bur +tooth polishing cup; Group F:slow tungsten carbide bur + silicon particle. The same number of adhesive samples in each group were ground by the methodabove, and the operation time was recorded. The enamel surface was qualitatively and quantitatively evaluated by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and surface roughness instrument. After bonding metal brackets, the SBS of brackets in each group was measured by universal mechanical tester, and the adhesive residual index (ARI) was analyzed. Results The removal efficiency of group B and C was higher, and that of group E was the lowest. SEM showed that the enamel morphology of group F was closest to group A. The roughness of group F was the lowest ((0.48±0.13)μm), which had no statistical difference with group A (P＞0.05). The SBS of group D was the highest ((16.61±1.99)MPa), which was statistically higher than group A (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in ARI index among all groups after bracket removal (P＞0.05). Conclusion The removal efficiency of diamondburs and green sandstone is high, but they have great damage to enamel; slow tungsten carbide bur combined with silicon particle has the lowest damage to enamel, and the removal efficiency is acceptable. The SBS of the bracket treated with slow tungsten carbide bur is the highest.

Key words: adhesive removal method, tooth surface roughness, shear bond strength

中图分类号:

R783.5

刘光俊, 马锦锦, 陶珂金, 江静, 冯剑颖. 不同粘接剂去除方式对釉质微观结构及托槽抗剪切粘接强度的影响[J]. 口腔医学, 2022, 42(9): 785-789.

LIU Guangjun, MA Jinjin, TAO Kejin, JIANG Jing, FENG Jianying. Effects of different adhesive removal methods on enamel microstructure and shear bond strength of brackets[J]. Stomatology, 2022, 42(9): 785-789.

参考文献

[1] Melvin EA, Yu QZ, Xu XM, et al. A comparison of traditional orthodontic polishing systems with composite polishing systems following orthodontic debonding[J]. Saudi Dent J, 2021, 33(8):877-883.
[2] 李爽, 胡敏. 关于正畸固定矫治中牙釉质脱矿的研究进展[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(8):685-688.
[3] Kechagia A, Zinelis S, Pandis N, et al. The effect of orthodontic adhesive and bracket-base design in adhesive remnant index on enamel[J].J World Fed Orthod, 2015, 4(1):18-22.
[4] Dilip S, Srinivas S, Mohammed Noufal MN, et al. Comparison of surface roughness of enamel and shear bond strength, between conventional acid etching and erbium, chromium-doped:Yttrium scandium-gallium-garnet laser etching-An in vitro study[J]. Dent Res J (Isfahan), 2018, 15(4):248-255.
[5] Sfondrini MF, Scribante A, Fraticelli D, et al. Epidemiological survey of different clinical techniques of orthodontic bracket debonding and enamel polishing[J]. J Orthod Sci, 2015, 4(4):123-127.
[6] Grazioli G, Hardan L, Bourgi R, et al. Residual adhesive removal methods for rebonding of debonded orthodontic metal brackets:Systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Materials (Basel), 2021, 14(20):6120.
[7] Fjeld M, Øgaard B. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of enamel surfaces exposed to 3 orthodontic bonding systems[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006, 130(5):575-581.
[8] Gwinnett AJ, Gorelick L. Microscopic evaluation of enamelafter debonding:Clinical application[J]. Am J Orthod, 1977, 71(6):651-665.
[9] Koprowski R, Machoy M, Woźniak K, et al. Automatic method of analysis of OCT images in the assessment of the tooth enamel surface after orthodontic treatment with fixed braces[J]. Biomed Eng Online, 2014, 13:48.
[10] Soares Tenório KC, Neupmann Feres MF, Tanaka CJ, et al. In vitro evaluation of enamel surface roughness and morphology after orthodontic debonding:Traditional cleanup systems versus polymer bur[J]. Int Orthod, 2020, 18(3):546-554.
[11] Alessandri Bonetti G, Zanarini M, Incerti Parenti S, et al. Evaluation of enamel surfaces after bracket debonding:An in-vivo study with scanning electron microscopy[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2011, 140(5):696-702.
[12] Janiszewska-Olszowska J, Szatkiewicz T, Tomkowski R, et al. Effect of orthodontic debonding and adhesive removal on the enamel-current knowledge and future perspectives-a systematic review[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2014, 20:1991-2001.
[13] Erdur EA,Akin M, Cime L, et al. Evaluation of enamel surface roughness after various finishing techniques for debonding of orthodontic brackets[J]. Turk J Orthod, 2016, 29(1):1-5.
[14] Vidor MM, Felix RP, Marchioro EM, et al. Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods[J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2015, 20(2):61-67.
[15] 肖云鹤, 原工杰, 王妍,等. 正畸托槽及牙面残余粘接剂的去除方法研究进展[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2013, 29(3):185-187.
[16] 钮晔, 安贝尔, 敬怡, 等. 5种不同去牙面正畸残余粘接剂方法比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2019, 28(2):136-140.
[17] Pinzan-Vercelino CRM, Souza Costa AC, Gurgel JA, et al. Comparison of enamel surface roughness and color alteration after bracket debonding and polishing with 2 systems:A split-mouth clinical trial[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2021, 160(5):686-694.
[18] Caixeta RV, Berger SB, Lopes MB, et al. Evaluation of enamel roughness after the removal of brackets bonded with different materials:in vivo study[J]. Braz Dent J, 2021, 32(5):34-40.
[19] Pinho M, Manso MC, Almeida RF, et al. Bond strength of metallic or ceramic orthodontic brackets to enamel, acrylic, or porcelain surfaces[J]. Materials (Basel), 2020, 13(22):5197.
[20] 操亚波, 傅露, 孙旭容, 等. 不同处理方法对脱落托槽再粘接抗剪切强度的影响[J]. 口腔医学, 2018, 38(3):230-233.
[21] Kunjappan S, Kumaar V, Prithiviraj, et al. The effect of bleaching of teeth on the bond strength of brackets:An in vitro study[J]. J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2013, 5(Suppl 1):S17-20.
[22] Loretto SC, Braz R, Lyra AM, et al. Influence of photopolymerization light source on enamel shear bond strength after bleaching[J]. Braz Dent J, 2004, 15(2):133-137.
[23] Pastrav M, Chisnoiu AM, Pastrav O, et al. Surface characteristics, fluoride release and bond strength evaluation of four orthodontic adhesives[J]. Materials (Basel), 2021, 14(13):3578.