Publication: Seramik Braketlerin Debonding İşlemindeki Klinik Başarısının Retrospektif Açıdan İncelenmesi
Abstract
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Radiance Plus seramik braketlerin üretici firmanın önerdiği iki farklı debonding aleti ile debondingindeki klinik başarısının retrospektif olarak değerlendirilmesidir. Materyal ve Metod: Bu çalışmada, yaşları 13 yıl 1 ay ile 24 yıl 11 ay arasında değişen Radiance Plus monokristalin seramik braketlerle tedavi görmüş 33 hastanın kayıtları, Sushi debonding pensi kullanılan 17 kişi ve Radiance Plus debonding pensi kulllanılan 16 kişi olmak üzere iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Braketleme öncesi horizontal çatlakların varlığı değerlendirilmiş olan; debraketing işlemi esnasındaki braket kırıkları kayıt edilmiş olan; debonding işlemi esnasında rahatsızlık hissi oluşup oluşmadığı 'var ya da yok' şeklinde kayıt edilmiş olan; debraketing işlemi sonrasında ARI skorlaması yapılmış olan; mine yüzeyindeki adezivlerin temizlenmesi sonrasında horizontal çatlakların varlığı değerlendirilmiş olan hastaların kayıtları dahil edilmiştir. Bulgular: Debonding işleminde Sushi debonding pensi kullanılan grubun %85,9'unda, Radiance Plus debonding pensi kullanılan grubun %85,4'ünde ARI skor 3 olarak tespit edilmiştir. İki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. Her iki grupta da debonding işlemi sonrasında mine yüzeyinde herhangi bir horizontal çatlağa rastlanmamıştır. Sushi debonding pensi kullanılan grubun %94,1'inde, Radiance Plus debonding pensi kullanılan grubun %93,8'inde debraketing işlemi sırasında hastalarda rahatsızlık hissi oluştuğu tespit edilmiştir. İki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. Debraketing işlemi sırasında Sushi debonding pensi kullanılan grupta 38 brakette, Radiance Plus debonding pensi kullanılan grupta 37 brakette braket kırığı meydana gelmiştir. Sonuç: Radiance Plus seramik braketlerin debonding işleminde üretici firmanın tavsiye ettiği her iki debonding aleti için de klinik olarak başarılı sonuçlar izlenmiştir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Radiance Plus seramik braketler, Sushi debonding aleti, Radiance Plus debonding aleti, ARI skor, horizontal çatlak
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical success of Radiance Plus ceramic brackets following the debonding process with two different pliers recommended by the manufacturer. Material and Method: In this study, the records of 33 patients (13-24 years old) who were treated with Radiance Plus monocrystalline ceramic brackets were retrospectively evaluated. These records were divided into two groups, i.e., 17 patients who were debonded with the Sushi plier and 16 patients who were debonded with the Radiance Plus plier. The records included contained the following information: presence of horizontal cracks before bracketing, bracket fractures during debracketing, discomfort during debonding, ARI score data, presence of horizontal cracks after adhesive removal. Results: The ARI score was found 3 for 85.9% in the Sushi plier group and 85.4 % in the Radiance Plus plier group. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups concerning this parameter. Furthermore, no horizontal cracks were present on the enamel surface after debonding in both groups. It was found that 94.1% of the Sushi group and 93.8% of the Radiance Plus group demonstrated discomfort during debracketing. No statistically significant difference existed between the two groups. During the debracketing process, bracket fractures occurred in 38 brackets in the Sushi group, and in 37 brackets in the group Radiance Plus group. Conclusion: Clinically successful results were observed for both of the debonding pliers recommended by the manufacturer during the debonding process of Radiance Plus ceramic brackets. Keywords: Radiance Plus ceramic brackets, Sushi debonding plier, Radiance Plus debonding plier, ARI score, horizontal crack
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical success of Radiance Plus ceramic brackets following the debonding process with two different pliers recommended by the manufacturer. Material and Method: In this study, the records of 33 patients (13-24 years old) who were treated with Radiance Plus monocrystalline ceramic brackets were retrospectively evaluated. These records were divided into two groups, i.e., 17 patients who were debonded with the Sushi plier and 16 patients who were debonded with the Radiance Plus plier. The records included contained the following information: presence of horizontal cracks before bracketing, bracket fractures during debracketing, discomfort during debonding, ARI score data, presence of horizontal cracks after adhesive removal. Results: The ARI score was found 3 for 85.9% in the Sushi plier group and 85.4 % in the Radiance Plus plier group. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups concerning this parameter. Furthermore, no horizontal cracks were present on the enamel surface after debonding in both groups. It was found that 94.1% of the Sushi group and 93.8% of the Radiance Plus group demonstrated discomfort during debracketing. No statistically significant difference existed between the two groups. During the debracketing process, bracket fractures occurred in 38 brackets in the Sushi group, and in 37 brackets in the group Radiance Plus group. Conclusion: Clinically successful results were observed for both of the debonding pliers recommended by the manufacturer during the debonding process of Radiance Plus ceramic brackets. Keywords: Radiance Plus ceramic brackets, Sushi debonding plier, Radiance Plus debonding plier, ARI score, horizontal crack
Description
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Volume
Issue
Start Page
End Page
62
