Bonding positional accuracy of attachments and marginal adaptation of in-house aligners – A quality improvement laboratory study

IF 2.4 3区医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1111/ocr.12843

Nathália Moraes Carvalho Barreto Brandão, Raiane Machado Maia, Victor de Morais Gomes, Carolina Resende, Alberto Nogueira da Gama Antunes, Bernardo Quiroga Souki

{"title":"Bonding positional accuracy of attachments and marginal adaptation of in-house aligners – A quality improvement laboratory study","authors":"Nathália Moraes Carvalho Barreto Brandão, Raiane Machado Maia, Victor de Morais Gomes, Carolina Resende, Alberto Nogueira da Gama Antunes, Bernardo Quiroga Souki","doi":"10.1111/ocr.12843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the 3D accuracy of attachment positioning and the adaptation of aligners to attachments using in-house templates made with either polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) or ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) and either pressure or vacuum thermoforming machines.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, 140 test specimens were resin-printed. Templates for the attachment bonding were made with 1-mm EVA or 0.5-mm PETG laminates. Orthodontic aligners were manufactured with 0.75-mm PETG. The thermoplastification process was carried out using either vacuum or pressure machines. The positional differences between the virtual and bonded attachments were assessed in the <i>X</i>, <i>Y</i> and <i>Z</i> coordinates. The marginal adaptation between the aligners and the attachments was measured.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Minor inaccuracies in the positioning of the attachments were observed in all combinations of thermoforming machines and plastic laminates used to fabricate the templates, mainly in the superior–inferior (<i>Z</i>) dimension. PETG performed better than EVA in the anterior region (<i>p</i> < .05). No association was found between thermoplastification machines and the accuracy of the positioning of the attachments (<i>p</i> > .05). While small misadaptations between the aligners and the attachments were observed, the EVA templates performed better than the PETG templates.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The inaccuracy of the attachment positioning and the misadaptation of the aligners to the attachments were slight. The vacuum and pressure thermoplastification machines showed no difference in attachment positioning accuracy. The PETG template was better than the EVA template in the anterior region, but the EVA attachments presented a better adaptation to the aligners than the PETG attachments.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":19652,"journal":{"name":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","volume":"27 S2","pages":"120-130"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ocr.12843","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the 3D accuracy of attachment positioning and the adaptation of aligners to attachments using in-house templates made with either polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) or ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) and either pressure or vacuum thermoforming machines.

Materials and Methods

Overall, 140 test specimens were resin-printed. Templates for the attachment bonding were made with 1-mm EVA or 0.5-mm PETG laminates. Orthodontic aligners were manufactured with 0.75-mm PETG. The thermoplastification process was carried out using either vacuum or pressure machines. The positional differences between the virtual and bonded attachments were assessed in the X, Y and Z coordinates. The marginal adaptation between the aligners and the attachments was measured.

Results

Minor inaccuracies in the positioning of the attachments were observed in all combinations of thermoforming machines and plastic laminates used to fabricate the templates, mainly in the superior–inferior (Z) dimension. PETG performed better than EVA in the anterior region (p < .05). No association was found between thermoplastification machines and the accuracy of the positioning of the attachments (p > .05). While small misadaptations between the aligners and the attachments were observed, the EVA templates performed better than the PETG templates.

Conclusions

The inaccuracy of the attachment positioning and the misadaptation of the aligners to the attachments were slight. The vacuum and pressure thermoplastification machines showed no difference in attachment positioning accuracy. The PETG template was better than the EVA template in the anterior region, but the EVA attachments presented a better adaptation to the aligners than the PETG attachments.

查看原文本刊更多论文

附着体的粘接位置准确性和内部矫正器的边缘适应性--一项质量改进实验室研究。

目标：评估使用聚对苯二甲酸乙二醇酯（PETG）或乙烯-醋酸乙烯酯（EVA）制作的内部模板和压力或真空热成型机进行的附着体定位的三维准确性以及对准器对附着体的适应性：共用树脂印制了 140 个测试样本。附着粘接的模板是用 1 毫米的 EVA 或 0.5 毫米的 PETG 层压板制作的。正畸矫治器用 0.75 毫米 PETG 制作。热塑过程使用真空或压力机进行。在 X、Y 和 Z 坐标上评估了虚拟附着体和粘结附着体之间的位置差异。测量了矫治器和附着体之间的边缘适应性：结果：在所有用于制作模板的热成型机和塑料层压板组合中，都观察到了附着体定位的轻微误差，主要是在上下（Z）维度上。在前部区域，PETG 的表现优于 EVA（p .05）。虽然可以观察到矫治器和附着体之间存在微小的不适应，但 EVA 模板的表现优于 PETG 模板：结论：附着体定位的不准确性和对准器与附着体的不适应性都很轻微。真空热塑机和压力热塑机在附件定位精度方面没有差异。在前牙区，PETG模板比EVA模板更好，但EVA附着体对矫治器的适应性比PETG附着体更好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

5.30

自引率

3.20%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research - Genes, Growth and Development is published to serve its readers as an international forum for the presentation and critical discussion of issues pertinent to the advancement of the specialty of orthodontics and the evidence-based knowledge of craniofacial growth and development. This forum is based on scientifically supported information, but also includes minority and conflicting opinions. The objective of the journal is to facilitate effective communication between the research community and practicing clinicians. Original papers of high scientific quality that report the findings of clinical trials, clinical epidemiology, and novel therapeutic or diagnostic approaches are appropriate submissions. Similarly, we welcome papers in genetics, developmental biology, syndromology, surgery, speech and hearing, and other biomedical disciplines related to clinical orthodontics and normal and abnormal craniofacial growth and development. In addition to original and basic research, the journal publishes concise reviews, case reports of substantial value, invited essays, letters, and announcements. The journal is published quarterly. The review of submitted papers will be coordinated by the editor and members of the editorial board. It is policy to review manuscripts within 3 to 4 weeks of receipt and to publish within 3 to 6 months of acceptance.