...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research >Comparison of the DebondingCharacteristics of Conventional and NewDebonding Instrument used for Ceramic,Composite and Metallic Brackets? An Invitro Study
【24h】

Comparison of the DebondingCharacteristics of Conventional and NewDebonding Instrument used for Ceramic,Composite and Metallic Brackets? An Invitro Study

机译：用于陶瓷，复合材料和金属支架的常规和新型脱胶仪器的脱胶特性比较？体外研究

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: Debonding procedure is time consuming and damaging to the enamel if performed with improper technique. Various debonding methods include: the conventional methods that use pliers or wrenches, an ultrasonic method, electrothermal devices, air pressure impulse devices, diamond burs to grind the brackets off the tooth surface and lasers. Among all these methods, using debonding pliers is most convenient and effective method but has been reported to cause damage to the teeth. Recently, a New Debonding Instrument designed specifically for ceramic and composite brackets has been introduced. As this is a new instrument, little information is available on efficacy of this instrument. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the debonding characteristics of both ?the conventional debonding Pliers? and ?the New debonding instrument? when removing ceramic, composite and metallic brackets.Materials and Methods: One Hundred Thirty eight extracted maxillary premolar teeth were collected and divided into two Groups: Group A and Group B (n = 69) respectively. They were further divided into 3 subGroups (n = 23) each according to the types of brackets to be bonded. In subGroups A1 and B1{stainless steel};A2 and B2{ceramic};A3 and B3{composite}adhesive pre- coated maxillary premolar brackets were used. Among them {ceramic and composite} adhesive pre-coated maxillary premolar brackets were bonded. All the teeth were etched using 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds and the brackets were bonded using Transbond XT primer. Brackets were debonded using Conventional Debonding Plier and New Debonding Instrument (Group B). After debonding, the enamel surface of each tooth was examined under stereo microscope (10X magnifications). Amodifiedadhesive remnant index (ARI) was used to quantify the amount of remaining adhesive on each tooth.Results: The observations demonstrate that the results of New Debonding Instrument for debonding of metal, ceramic and composite brackets were statistically significantly different (p = 0.04) and superior from the results of conventional debonding Pliers.Conclusion: The debonding efficiency of New Debonding Instrument is better than the debonding efficiency of Conventional Debonding Pliers for use of metal, ceramic and composite brackets respectively.
机译：背景：如果使用不当技术，则脱胶过程既费时又会损坏瓷釉。各种脱胶方法包括：使用钳子或扳手的常规方法，超声方法，电热设备，气压脉冲设备，将车架磨离牙齿表面的金刚石钻和激光。在所有这些方法中，使用去粘钳是最方便，最有效的方法，但据报道会造成牙齿损坏。最近，推出了一种专为陶瓷和复合材料托架设计的新型脱胶仪器。由于这是一种新仪器，因此关于该仪器功效的信息很少。这项研究的目的是评估两个“常规脱胶钳”的脱胶特性。和“新的脱胶工具”？材料与方法：收集一百三十八颗拔除的上颌前磨牙，并分为两组：A组和B组（n = 69）。根据要绑定的括号的类型，它们进一步分为3个子组（n = 23）。在亚组A1和B1 {不锈钢}; A2和B2 {陶瓷}; A3和B3 {复合}上使用预涂的上颌前磨牙支架。其中{陶瓷和复合}粘合剂预涂层的上颌前磨牙托槽被粘结。所有牙齿均使用37％磷酸蚀刻15秒，并使用Transbond XT底漆粘结托槽。使用传统的脱胶钳和新的脱胶工具（B组）将支架脱胶。脱胶后，在立体显微镜下（放大10倍）检查每个牙齿的釉质表面。结果：观察结果表明，用于金属，陶瓷和复合材料托槽剥离的新型剥离工具的结果在统计学上有显着差异（p = 0.04），并且结论：与金属支架，陶瓷支架和复合材料支架相比，新型去粘仪的去粘效果要好于传统去粘钳。

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