Publication: Tabanı İki Farklı Adeziv İle Kaplanmış Braket Sisteminin Beyaz Nokta Lezyonu Oluşumu Üzerine Etkilerinin İncelenmesi
Abstract
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı tabanı iki farklı adeziv ile kaplı braketin etrafında meydana gelen beyaz nokta lezyonlarının değerlendirilmesidir. Birey ve Yöntem: Çalışma split-mouth olarak dizayn edildi ve çalışmaya 34 hasta dahil edildi. Tabanı adeziv ile kaplı 3M APC™ Flash-Free Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) braketler ile tabanı adeziv ile kaplı 3M APC™ II Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) braketler kullanıldı. Tedavi sonunda her dişin tek tek dijital fotoğrafları alınarak beyaz nokta lezyonları skorlandı ve ayrıca lezyon alanları hesaplandı. Tedavinin bittiği aynı seansta DIAGNOdent (DIAGNOdent pen; KaVo Dental, Biberach, Germany) ile dişlerin mineralizasyon düzeyi ölçülerek beyaz nokta lezyonu oluşumu değerlendirildi. İki farklı braket sisteminin yapıştırma süresi açısından karşılaştırılması yapıldı. Çalışmanın in-vitro kısmında ise iki braket sisteminin bağlanma dayanımları değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Dijital fotoğraflar üzerinden yapılan değerlendirmede her iki grup arasında gerek oluşan beyaz nokta lezyonu sayısı gerekse lezyon alanlarının büyüklüğü açısından fark bulunamamıştır. Üst çenede Flash Free grubunda dişlerin %55,3'ünün, kontrol grubunda %61,2'sinin sağlıklı olduğu görülmüştür. Alt çenede çenede Flash Free grubunda dişlerin %61,2'sinde, kontrol grubunda ise %64,7'sinde lezyon meydana gelmemiştir. DIAGNOdent ölçümlerinin değerlendirilmesinde FF grubunda 3 dişte, kontrol grubunda ise 4 dişte BNL oluşumu tespit edilmiş, iki grup arasında fark olmadığı saptanmıştır. Bonding sürelerinin değerlendirilmesinde ise, iki grup arasında anlamlı fark görülmüştür. Braketlerin bağlanma dayanımlarının in-vitro ortamda karşılaştırılmasında her iki gruptaki braketlerin klinik kabul edilebilir bağlanma değerlerine sahip olduğu görülmüş (Flash Free grubunda 19,76 MPa ± 5,14 MPa, kontrol grubunda 19,61 MPa ± 9,01 MPa ), gruplar arasında ise anlamlı fark bulunamamıştır. Sonuç: Dijital fotoğrafların skorlanması, beyaz nokta lezyon alanlarının hesaplanması, DIAGNOdent ölçümlerinin değerlendirilmesi, bağlanma dayanımlarının ölçülmesi ile elde ettiğimiz bulgular sonucu Flash-Free braketlerin klinik kullanıma uygun olduğu, bunun yanında yapıştırma süresini kısaltması ile kolaylık sağladığı, fakat beyaz nokta lezyonu oluşumu açısından konvansiyonel sistemlerden farkının olmadığı görülmüştür.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of two different adhesive coated bracket systems on the white spot lesions (WSLs). Material and Method: The study had a split-mouth design and 34 patients were included in the study. 3M APC ™ Flash-Free Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) and 3M APC ™ Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) brackets were used. At the end of the treatment, digital photographs of each tooth were taken and WSLs were scored and lesion areas were calculated. At the same session, the mineralization level of the teeth was measured with DIAGNOdent (DIAGNOdent pen; KaVo Dental, Biberach, Germany). Two bracket systems were compared in terms of bonding time. In the in-vitro part of the study, the bond strengths of the two bracket systems were evaluated. Results: There was no difference between the two groups in terms of the number of white spot lesions and the size of the lesion areas. In the maxillary arch, 55.3% of the teeth in the Flash Free group and 61.2% in the control group were found to be healthy. In the mandibular arch, no lesions occurred in 61.2% of the teeth in the Flash Free group and in 64.7% of the control group. In the evaluation of DIAGNOdent measurements, WSLs formation was detected in 3 teeth in FF group and in 4 teeth in control group and no difference was found between the two groups. In the evaluation of bonding times, there was a significant difference between the two groups. In the in-vitro comparison of the shear bond strength of the brackets, it was seen that the brackets in both groups had clinically acceptable values (In the Flash Free group is 19,76 MPa ± 5,14 MPa, in the control group is 19,61 MPa ± 9,01 MPa), but there was no significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: After the scoring of digital photographs, calculation of white spot lesion areas, evaluation of DIAGNOdent measurements, determination of shear bond strengths, Flash-Free brackets are suitable for clinical use. As well as the use of Flash-Free brackets shorten the bonding time. However, it was found that it is not different from conventional systems in terms of white spot lesion formation.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of two different adhesive coated bracket systems on the white spot lesions (WSLs). Material and Method: The study had a split-mouth design and 34 patients were included in the study. 3M APC ™ Flash-Free Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) and 3M APC ™ Adhesive Coated Appliance System (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) brackets were used. At the end of the treatment, digital photographs of each tooth were taken and WSLs were scored and lesion areas were calculated. At the same session, the mineralization level of the teeth was measured with DIAGNOdent (DIAGNOdent pen; KaVo Dental, Biberach, Germany). Two bracket systems were compared in terms of bonding time. In the in-vitro part of the study, the bond strengths of the two bracket systems were evaluated. Results: There was no difference between the two groups in terms of the number of white spot lesions and the size of the lesion areas. In the maxillary arch, 55.3% of the teeth in the Flash Free group and 61.2% in the control group were found to be healthy. In the mandibular arch, no lesions occurred in 61.2% of the teeth in the Flash Free group and in 64.7% of the control group. In the evaluation of DIAGNOdent measurements, WSLs formation was detected in 3 teeth in FF group and in 4 teeth in control group and no difference was found between the two groups. In the evaluation of bonding times, there was a significant difference between the two groups. In the in-vitro comparison of the shear bond strength of the brackets, it was seen that the brackets in both groups had clinically acceptable values (In the Flash Free group is 19,76 MPa ± 5,14 MPa, in the control group is 19,61 MPa ± 9,01 MPa), but there was no significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: After the scoring of digital photographs, calculation of white spot lesion areas, evaluation of DIAGNOdent measurements, determination of shear bond strengths, Flash-Free brackets are suitable for clinical use. As well as the use of Flash-Free brackets shorten the bonding time. However, it was found that it is not different from conventional systems in terms of white spot lesion formation.
Description
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Volume
Issue
Start Page
End Page
90
