【摘要】 目的评价两种不同底板设计的国产多晶体氧化铝陶瓷托槽的剪切粘接强度。方法实验组为国产沟槽底板和网格底板陶瓷托槽,对照组为临床常用的多晶体氧化铝陶瓷托槽Crystaline IV。30颗离体上颌双尖牙随机分为3组,每组10颗,使用37%液体磷酸和京津釉质粘接剂分别粘接上述三种托槽,在0.9%生理盐水中室温保存24h。使用WDW3050型微机控制电子万能试验机检测剪切粘接强度。托槽脱落后记录粘接剂残留指数、陶瓷托槽的折断数目和釉质表面出现肉眼可见缺损的牙齿数目。结果国产沟槽底板、网格底板陶瓷托槽及Crystaline IV的剪切粘接强度分别为12.10±2.69MPa、10.17±2.55MPa及14.66±2.39MPa。Crystaline IV和国产网格底板陶瓷托槽剪切粘接强度的差异有显著性意义。三种陶瓷托槽的主要脱开部位均在粘接剂内,所有样本未出现陶瓷托槽折断和肉眼可见的釉质缺损。结论两种国产陶瓷托槽均能够获得足够的剪切粘接强度。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the shear bond strength of two kinds of domestic ceramic brackets.MethodsThe experimental group was composed of domestic ceramic brackets of different base design,groove base and grid base.The control group was Crystaline IV commonly used in clinic.Thirty extracted human maxillary premolars were selected for bonding.37% phosphoric-acid and dental enamel bonding resin were used.All bonded specimens were placed in saline for 24 hours at room temperature,and were tested on DWD3050 electronic testing machine to determine the shear bond strength.After debonding the adhesive remnant index (ARI) were recorded,the brackets fracture and enamel damage were observed by naked eyes.Results The shear bond strengths of domestic ceramic brackets with groove base,grid base and Crystaline IV were 12.10±2.69MPa,10.17±2.55Mpa and 14.66±2.39Mpa,respectively.The difference in bond strength was significant between domestic ceramic bracket with grid base and Crystaline IV.The bond failure location of the three types of ceramic brackets were mainly in cement.No ceramic bracket fracture and enamel damage were observed by naked eyes.Conclusion The shear bond strengths of domestic ceramic brackets with groove and grid base studied were enough for clinical application.更多还原