Erika Machado Caldeira, Paola Estefan Sass, Vicente Telles da Silva, Nathalia Lima Freze Fernandes, C. T. Mattos, C. Elias, A. Bolognese, M. C. G. Nojima
{"title":"正畸粘接系统中不同特性的残余粘接闪光。","authors":"Erika Machado Caldeira, Paola Estefan Sass, Vicente Telles da Silva, Nathalia Lima Freze Fernandes, C. T. Mattos, C. Elias, A. Bolognese, M. C. G. Nojima","doi":"10.29327/24816.5.2-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Excess of adhesive around brackets negatively impact oral health of orthodontic patients. Objective: Evaluate the influence of orthodontic bonding system in removal of adhesive flash around orthodontic brackets. Methods: Based on their characteristics, four orthodontic bonding systems were selected: lightcuring adhesive (G1 - TransbondTM XT); pink pigmented light-curing adhesive (G2- TransbondTM Plus Color Change); resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3 - FujiOrthoTM LC); and auto-curing adhesive (G4 - ConciseTM). For each group (n=10), a single operator placed metal brackets on bovine teeth (n=40) and used an explorer tip to visually remove flash excess. After curing / setting, the sampleswere taken to a stereomicroscope and the Axio Vision 4.4 software was used to measure the area of remnant adhesive flash around each bracket. The quantitative data obtained was analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hoc test at = 0.05. Results: The results show that the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3) had a larger area of remnant material than the other groups. There was no statistical difference between the other groups (G1, G2, and G4), independently of pigmentation or curing technique. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement results in a larger area of remnant flash excess, which can negatively impact oral health. Pigmentation and curing technique did not influence on remnant flash excess.","PeriodicalId":323707,"journal":{"name":"Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal (Revista Científica do CRO-RJ)","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Remnant adhesive flash in orthodontic bonding systems with different characteristics.\",\"authors\":\"Erika Machado Caldeira, Paola Estefan Sass, Vicente Telles da Silva, Nathalia Lima Freze Fernandes, C. T. Mattos, C. Elias, A. Bolognese, M. C. G. Nojima\",\"doi\":\"10.29327/24816.5.2-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Excess of adhesive around brackets negatively impact oral health of orthodontic patients. Objective: Evaluate the influence of orthodontic bonding system in removal of adhesive flash around orthodontic brackets. Methods: Based on their characteristics, four orthodontic bonding systems were selected: lightcuring adhesive (G1 - TransbondTM XT); pink pigmented light-curing adhesive (G2- TransbondTM Plus Color Change); resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3 - FujiOrthoTM LC); and auto-curing adhesive (G4 - ConciseTM). For each group (n=10), a single operator placed metal brackets on bovine teeth (n=40) and used an explorer tip to visually remove flash excess. After curing / setting, the sampleswere taken to a stereomicroscope and the Axio Vision 4.4 software was used to measure the area of remnant adhesive flash around each bracket. The quantitative data obtained was analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hoc test at = 0.05. Results: The results show that the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3) had a larger area of remnant material than the other groups. There was no statistical difference between the other groups (G1, G2, and G4), independently of pigmentation or curing technique. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement results in a larger area of remnant flash excess, which can negatively impact oral health. Pigmentation and curing technique did not influence on remnant flash excess.\",\"PeriodicalId\":323707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal (Revista Científica do CRO-RJ)\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal (Revista Científica do CRO-RJ)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29327/24816.5.2-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal (Revista Científica do CRO-RJ)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29327/24816.5.2-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导语:托槽周围粘接剂过多会影响正畸患者的口腔健康。目的:评价正畸粘接系统对正畸托槽粘连闪光清除的影响。方法:根据正畸粘接系统的特点,选择4种粘接系统:光固化胶(G1 - TransbondTM XT);粉红色光固化胶(G2- TransbondTM Plus Color Change);树脂改性玻璃离子水泥(G3 - FujiOrthoTM LC);和自动固化胶(G4 - ConciseTM)。对于每组(n=10),一名操作员在牛牙齿(n=40)上放置金属支架,并使用探针尖从视觉上去除多余的闪光。固化/凝固后,将样品置于立体显微镜下,使用Axio Vision 4.4软件测量每个支架周围残余粘闪光的面积。得到的定量数据采用Kruskal-Wallis和Dunn事后检验进行分析,检验标准为= 0.05。结果:树脂改性玻璃离聚体水泥(G3)的残余材料面积比其他组大。其他组(G1、G2和G4)之间无统计学差异,与色素沉着或固化技术无关。结论:树脂改性玻璃离子水门合剂的使用会导致大面积的残余闪光过量,对口腔健康产生不利影响。色素沉着和固化技术对残余闪光量没有影响。
Remnant adhesive flash in orthodontic bonding systems with different characteristics.
Introduction: Excess of adhesive around brackets negatively impact oral health of orthodontic patients. Objective: Evaluate the influence of orthodontic bonding system in removal of adhesive flash around orthodontic brackets. Methods: Based on their characteristics, four orthodontic bonding systems were selected: lightcuring adhesive (G1 - TransbondTM XT); pink pigmented light-curing adhesive (G2- TransbondTM Plus Color Change); resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3 - FujiOrthoTM LC); and auto-curing adhesive (G4 - ConciseTM). For each group (n=10), a single operator placed metal brackets on bovine teeth (n=40) and used an explorer tip to visually remove flash excess. After curing / setting, the sampleswere taken to a stereomicroscope and the Axio Vision 4.4 software was used to measure the area of remnant adhesive flash around each bracket. The quantitative data obtained was analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hoc test at = 0.05. Results: The results show that the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (G3) had a larger area of remnant material than the other groups. There was no statistical difference between the other groups (G1, G2, and G4), independently of pigmentation or curing technique. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement results in a larger area of remnant flash excess, which can negatively impact oral health. Pigmentation and curing technique did not influence on remnant flash excess.