摘要
目的探讨GC Fuji正畸黏接剂和京津釉质黏接剂黏接磨牙颊面管的临床效果。方法将60例患者随机分为两组,分别使用GC Fuji正畸黏接剂和京津釉质黏接剂进行黏接型磨牙颊面管的黏接,对其临床治疗过程中颊面管的脱落率及脱落后牙釉质上的黏接材料残留指数进行观察分析。结果GC Fuji正畸黏接剂组的颊面管脱落率略低于京津釉质黏接剂组,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两种黏接剂黏接后均显示,上颌第一恒磨牙上的颊面管脱落率最低,而上颌第二恒磨牙的颊面管脱落率最高;两组颊面管脱落后黏接材料牙面残留指数均多数为3,分别占总体分布的55.0%和59.1%。结论黏接黏接型颊面管时使用GC Fuji正畸黏接剂和京津釉质黏接剂的黏接效果差别不大;两组颊面管脱落时断裂界面均多数在牙釉质与黏接材料之间。
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of two kinds of orthodontic cement in the bonding of directly bonded buccal tube. Methods 60 cases were divided into two groups randomly, and directly bonded buceal tubes were bonded seperately with GC Fuji ortho bonding adhesive （A） and enamel bonding resin （B）. The bonding failure rate and the adhesive remnant index were calculated. Results The bonding failure rates of the two groups were A 〈 B, however had no significant difference （X2=2.772,P 〉 0.05）. The bonding failure rate in the upper first molar was the lowest and that of the upper second molar was the highest in both of the two groups. Most of the adhesive remnant index in both group are 3. Conclusions The adhesive effect of GC Fuji ORTHO and enamel bonding resin has no significant difference in bonding directly bonded buccal tube. The fractures of the debondings in both groups were mainly between the enamel and the cement.
出处
《中华口腔医学研究杂志（电子版）》
CAS
2009年第4期51-53,共3页
Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition)
