(34.239.150.57) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/14 22:47
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳幸妤
研究生(外文):Hsing-Yu Chen
論文名稱:不同去鍵結技術對陶瓷托架黏著斷裂模式的影響
論文名稱(外文):Effects of Different Debonding Techniques on the Adhesive Failure Modes of Ceramic Brackets
指導教授:林俊彬林俊彬引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:臨床牙醫學研究所
學門:醫藥衛生學門
學類:牙醫學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:中文
論文頁數:121
中文關鍵詞:陶瓷托架去鍵結預裂
外文關鍵詞:ceramic bracketdebondingpre-crack
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:319
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
陶瓷托架(ceramic bracket)為因應美觀需求所發展的美觀托架。陶瓷的性質非常堅硬且脆,這兩種性質和陶瓷托架本身與牙齒表面的高鍵結強度造成了臨床使用的一些困難。包括在去鍵結(debonding)的過程中,有托架斷裂和造成牙釉質受損的問題。因而有許多廠商不斷的做一些研究和開發去改變陶瓷托架的托架座(bracket base)的設計,或者引進一些新的去鍵結方法來配合各種不同設計的新型陶瓷托架的設計。
本研究的目的是要評估口外實驗中臨床上常用的陶瓷托架以雙重聚合(dual-cured)矯正黏著劑黏於牙釉質表面,去鍵結所需要的力量大小以及斷裂模式(failure mode)。實驗使用之托架包括單晶型的矯正托架(Inspire, Ormco, Orange, CA),和有含去球體區域(ball reduction band)之單晶型托架(Inspire Ice, Ormco, Orange, CA)以及多晶型的矯正托架(Clarity, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA)。矯正托架都是使用上顎第一小臼齒的托架,都是以相同的鍵結樹脂系統黏在已拔下來的人類小臼齒上,所有標本都在攝氏37度的蒸餾水中水浴隔夜。
在第一部份的實驗,每一種托架各以十個標本,由同一位操作者由手工操作的方式遵照廠商所建議去鍵結的方法來去鍵結以便模擬臨床。Clarity使用How pliers,Inspire和Inspire Ice則使用廠商提供的拋棄式特殊塑膠鉗來移除托架。第二部分則是將廠商所建議使用的鉗架在自製模擬臨床去鍵結的標準化模具上,再配合Instron萬用測試機標準化去鍵結步驟,以模擬臨床去鍵結的型態。每一托架各以二十個標本來做實驗,以力量位移圖記錄去鍵結所需的力量。第三部份是用二十個Inspire矯正托架以高頻率超音波之切割模式在托架牙齦端以及兩個線角處,於托架底和牙釉質的交界面作預裂(pre-crack),再以和Inspire托架相同的去鍵結步驟作拆除托架的動作。另外以二十個Clarity矯正托架則在托架近心端和遠心端,於托架底和牙釉質的交界面作預裂,再以和Clarity托架相同的去鍵結步驟作拆除托架的動作。以力量位移圖記錄去鍵結所需的力量。所有牙齒和矯正托架都以立體光學顯微鏡和掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察。
研究結果顯示,第一部分用手去鍵結:三種廠牌的托架呈現的都是一種混合型態的斷裂模式,大多數的斷裂都發生在托架和黏著層的交界面。三種廠牌托架產生托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的比例與組別有顯著相關(p=0.0057)。Inspire,Inspire Ice和Clarity托架分別佔60%、20%和0%,Inspire和Inspire Ice的托架斷裂都發生在托架底部靠咬合面端。在三組中都沒有發生牙釉質斷裂的情形。
第二部分用Instron去鍵結,拆除托架所需要的力量大小,依序Inspire為25.72牛頓,Inspire Ice為17.92牛頓,Clarity為76.89牛頓。三種廠牌的斷裂模式和第一部分相同,以發生在托架和黏著層的交界面為大部分。三種廠牌托架產生托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的比例與組別有顯著相關(p=0.0473)。Inspire,Inspire Ice和Clarity托架分別佔65%、15%和10%。Clarity的托架斷裂發生在托架翼和托架垂直溝槽,Inspire和Inspire Ice的托架斷裂都發生在托架底部靠咬合面端。在三組中都沒有發生牙釉質斷裂的情形。
比較新型含去球體區域的Inspire Ice矯正托架和舊型Inspire托架,顯示顯著減少拆除托架所需的力量(p=0.0125)和降低托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的情形(p=0.0044)。顯示新型的托架設計已有改善部分去鍵結時的問題。
第三部分以超音波作預裂(pre-crack)的部分,拆除托架所需要的力量大小,pre-crack Inspire為16.66牛頓,pre-crack Clarity為39.02牛頓。斷裂模式仍以托架和黏著層的交界面為主。作過超音波預裂的Inspire托架,托架發生斷裂的情形為5%;作過預裂的Clarity托架,沒有托架發生斷裂。兩組都沒有牙釉質斷裂的情形發生。
作過超音波預裂的Inspire托架和原始的Inspire托架相比,顯示顯著減少拆除托架所需的力量(p=0.0039)和降低托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的情形(p=0.0012)。作過超音波預裂的Clarity托架和原始的Clarity托架相比,亦顯示顯著減少拆除托架所需的力量(p=0.0015)和降低托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的情形(p=0.0471)。結果顯示在托架底部和牙釉質之交界面以超音波作預裂,不需犧牲鍵結強度(bonding strength),但在去鍵結時,又可以較小的力量達到去鍵結,顯著降低托架斷裂且殘留在牙齒表面的比例,又無牙釉質斷裂的發生,可有效減少陶瓷矯正托架去鍵結時的問題,是一值得繼續發展和研究的去鍵結技術。
Ceramic brackets were developed because of requirements for good esthetics. Ceramics are very hard and brittle. The combinations of these properties and high bond strengths have led to significant problems. Reports of bracket fracture and enamel damage during debonding have raised questions about the safety of the various procedures used to remove these brackets. The various manufactures have therefore been continued to modify the base designs of ceramic brackets and have introduced new debonding techniques for each particular brand of bracket.
The objectives of this study were to evaluate in vitro debonding forces and failure modes of currently used ceramic brackets bonded to enamel with a dual-cured orthodontic adhesive. Conventional monocrystalline ceramic brackets (Inspire, Ormco, Orange, CA), a new design of monocrystalline ceramic brackets with a ball reduction area (Inspire Ice, Ormco, Orange, CA), and polycrystalline ceramic brackets (Clarity, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) were bonded to extracted human premolars using the same bonding system. Brackets for the upper first premolars were chosen in this study. All bonded specimens were placed in distilled water overnight at 37˚C and were randomly assigned to 3 parts of the experiment.
In part 1, 30 specimens, 10 of each type, were removed with debonding pliers recommended by the manufacturers. Inspire and Inspire Ice ceramic brackets were removed by a set of disposable plastic pliers that suggested by the manufacturer. Clarity ceramic brackets were removed using How pliers.
In part 2, 60 specimens, 20 of each type, were used in the test. All specimens were tested on an Instron universal testing machine to determine the debonding force and to standardize debonding procedures. A specially designed set-up with disposable plastic pliers was used to debond the Inspire and Inspire Ice brackets to simulate clinical debonding procedures. Another set-up and How pliers were used to debond the Clarity ceramic brackets.
In part 3, 20 Inspire and 20 Clarity ceramic brackets were used. An ultrasonic tip with a cutting mode was used to make pre-cracks at the gingival side and 2 gingival line angles of the Inspire brackets between the base of the bracket and the enamel. The debonding procedure was the same as that of the Inspire ceramic brackets. The ultrasonic tip was used to make pre-cracks at the mesial and distal sides of the Clarity brackets between the base of the bracket and the enamel. The debonding procedure was the same as that of the Clarity ceramic brackets.
All teeth were examined using optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. The following results were obtained.
In part 1, all groups showed a mixed mode of failure when examined under scanning electron microscope (SEM). Most of the test brackets failed at the bracket-adhesive interface. A cohesive bracket fracture and remains on the enamel surface were noted for all three types of ceramic brackets (60% of Inspire, 20% of Inspire Ice and 0% of Clarity). The ceramic fractures of Inspire and Inspire Ice were located on the occlusal aspect of the base. No enamel damage was found after the brackets were removed.
In part 2, the mean debonding forces of Inspire, Inspire Ice and Clarity were 25.72, 17.92, and 76.89 N, respectively. All groups showed a mixed mode of failure when examined under SEM. Most of the test brackets failed at the bracket-adhesive interface. A cohesive bracket fracture and remains on the enamel surface were noted for all three types of ceramic brackets (65% of Inspire, 15% of Inspire Ice and 10% of Clarity). The cohesive ceramic fractures of Clarity were located at the wing and at the vertical debonding slot. The ceramic fractures of Inspire and Inspire Ice were located on the occlusal aspect of the base. No enamel damage was found after the brackets were removed.
The results of a comparison of the Inspire and Inspire Ice ceramic brackets indicated that a significantly reduced force was needed to remove the Inspire Ice brackets(p=0.0125)and risk of bracket fracture during debonding was also reduced (p=0.0044). Therefore, the new design of Inspire Ice ceramic brackets with a ball reduction band may reduce part of the problems of debonding.
In part 3, the mean debonding forces of the pre-cracked Inspire and pre-crack Clarity brackets were 16.66 and 39.02 N, respectively. All groups showed a mixed mode of failure when examined under SEM. Most of the test brackets failed at the bracket-adhesive interface. Cohesive ceramic bracket fracture and fractures remaining on the enamel surface was found 5% of the pre-cracked Inspire ceramic brackets and 0% of the pre-cracked Clarity ceramic brackets. Ceramic fractures of the pre-cracked Inspire brackets were located on the occlusal aspect of the base. No enamel damage was found after the brackets were removed.
The results of a comparison between the pre-cracked Inspire and the conventional Inspire ceramic brackets indicated that a significantly reduced force was needed to remove the pre-cracked brackets(p=0.0039)and reduced risk of bracket fracture during debonding(p=0.0012). Results of a comparison between the pre-cracked Clarity and the conventional Clarity ceramic brackets also significantly reduced force needed to remove the bracket(p=0.0015)and that was reduced risk of bracket fracture during debonding (p=0.0471). Pre-cracking at the bracket-enamel interface by cutting with a ultrasonic tip is helpful to reduce the debonding force and the risk of bracket fracture. No enamel damage was noted under SEM when ultrasonic used. This technique is helpful in reducing problems of debonding and is worthy of further development.
目錄

謝誌----------------------------------------------------------------------------------i
中文摘要---------------------------------------------------------------------------ii
英文摘要--------------------------------------------------------------------------v
第一章:前言-----------------------------------------------------------------------1
第二章:文獻回顧-----------------------------------------------------------------3
第三章:研究目的-----------------------------------------------------------------7
第四章:材料與方法--------------------------------------------------------------9
4.1 標本的製備-----------------------------------------------------------------9
4.2 牙齒表面的處理-----------------------------------------------------------9
4.3 黏著劑的使用--------------------------------------------------------------9
4.4 去鍵結(debonding)的方法--------------------------------------------10
4.4.1 以手操作的方式模擬臨床去鍵結的情形-----------------------10
4.4.2 標準化去鍵結步驟--------------------------------------------------10
4.4.3以超音波製造預裂(pre-crack)------------------------------------11
4.5 標本的觀察-------------------------------------------------------------- 12
4.5.1 立體光學顯微鏡觀察-----------------------------------------------12
4.5.2 掃描式電子顯微鏡(SEM)觀察----------------------------------12
4.6 斷裂模式(failure modes)的定義--------------------------------------14
4.6.1第一型:內聚式陶瓷斷裂--------------------------------------------14
4.6.2 第二型:內聚式樹脂斷裂-------------------------------------------14
4.6.3 第三型:內聚式牙釉質斷裂----------------------------------------14
4.6.4 第四型:斷裂在陶瓷和樹脂交界面-------------------------------15
4.6.5 第五型:斷裂在樹脂和牙釉質的交界面-------------------------15
4.7 斷裂模式的評估---------------------------------------------------------15
4.8 評估殘留在牙齒表面的黏著劑比例---------------------------------16
4.9 評估矯正托架斷裂的比例---------------------------------------------16
4.10 托架斷裂-----------------------------------------------------------------16
4.11 統計方法-----------------------------------------------------------------17
第五章:結果---------------------------------------------------------------------19
5.1以手操作的方式模擬臨床去鍵結的情形----------------------------19
5.2標準化去鍵結步驟-------------------------------------------------------21
5.3 以超音波製造預裂-----------------------------------------------------24
5.4 去鍵結所需要力量的箱型圖------------------------------------------28
5.5 各個組別的陶瓷托架在五種斷裂模式,托架斷裂個數的雷達圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------28
第六章:討論---------------------------------------------------------------------29
6.1 拆除托架所需的力量---------------------------------------------------29
6-2 斷裂模式------------------------------------------------------------------30
6.3 樹脂的使用---------------------------------------------------------------35
6.4 黏著層殘留在牙齒表面的比例---------------------------------------35
6.5 超音波製造引導斷裂的切口------------------------------------------36
第七章:結論---------------------------------------------------------------------40
第八章:參考文獻---------------------------------------------------------------41












圖次

圖4-1a:標準化拆除矯正托架的裝置:鋁管及其定位器--------------------------------46
圖4-1b:Clarity矯正托架以定位器定位在鋁管中,以石膏包埋固定-----------------46
圖4-2a:Clarity矯正托架的標準化去鍵結裝置------------------------------------------47
圖4-2b:Clarity矯正托架去鍵結的近觀---------------------------------------------------47
圖4-3a:Inspire和Inspire Ice矯正托架的標準化去鍵結裝置--------------------------48
圖4-3b:Inspire和Inspire Ice矯正托架去鍵結的近觀-----------------------------------48
圖4-4:Instron萬用測試機--------------------------------------------------------------------49
圖4-5a:Inspire Ice矯正托架的荷重位移紀錄圖-----------------------------------------50
圖4-5b:Clarity矯正托架的荷重位移紀錄圖---------------------------------------------50
圖4-6:ProphyMax超音波儀器--------------------------------------------------------------51
圖4-7:使用的超音波尖頭(型號S13R)----------------------------------------------------51
圖4-8a:以超音波在Inspire托架牙齦端的線角作預裂---------------------------------52
圖4-8b:在Inspire矯正托架的牙齦端線角處,超音波作預裂的痕跡----------------52
圖4-9a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察Inspire托架的牙齦端預裂處(30X)--------------53
圖4-9b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察Inspire托架牙齦端的預裂處(205X)------------53
圖4-10a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察Inspire托架牙齦端的線角預裂處(96X)------54
圖4-10b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察Inspire托架牙齦端的線角預裂處(220X)----54
圖4-11a:觀察pre-cracked Inspire托架去鍵結後的牙齒表面之線角處--------------55
圖4-11b:觀察pre-cracked Inspire托架去鍵結後的牙齒表面之牙齦端--------------55
圖4-12:在Clarity矯正托架的近心和遠心端,以超音波作預裂----------------------56
圖4-13a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察pre-cracked Clarity托架------------------------57
圖4-13b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察Clarity矯正托架,以超音波作預裂的痕跡---58
圖4-14a:觀察pre-cracked Clarity托架去鍵結後的牙齒表面1------------------------58
圖4-14b:觀察pre-cracked Clarity托架去鍵結後的牙齒表面2------------------------59
圖4-14c:觀察pre-cracked Clarity托架去鍵結後的牙齒表面3------------------------59
圖4-15:光學立體顯微鏡---------------------------------------------------------------------60
圖4-16:捕捉影像到電腦影像分析系統作進一步的分析------------------------------61
圖4-17:影像分析系統測量立體光學顯微鏡下各種斷裂模式的比例---------------61
圖4-18:臨界點乾燥器------------------------------------------------------------------------62
圖4-19:覆膜機---------------------------------------------------------------------------------62
圖4-20a:掃描式電子顯微鏡-----------------------------------------------------------------63
圖4-20b:掃描式電子顯微鏡的影像使用影像擷取及處理系統擷取影像---------63
圖4-21:第一型:內聚式陶瓷斷裂的示意圖-----------------------------------------------64
圖4-22:立體光學顯微鏡觀察Clarity矯正托架的第一型斷裂------------------------64
圖4-23a:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察Clarity矯正托架的第一型斷裂(28X)------------65
圖4-23b:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察Clarity矯正托架的第一型斷裂(1100X)---------65
圖4-24:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察到Inspire Ice矯正托架斷裂處(235X)--------------66
圖4-25a:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察Inspire托架斷裂殘留在牙齒表面(26X)---------66
圖4-25b:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察Inspire托架斷裂殘留在牙齒表面(68X)--------67
圖4-25c:掃描式電子顯微鏡觀察Inspire托架斷裂殘留在牙齒表面(1200X)------67
圖4-26:第二型:內聚式樹脂斷裂的示意圖-----------------------------------------------68
圖4-27a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到第二型斷裂模式(51X)------------------------68
圖4-27b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到第二型斷裂模式(250X)-----------------------69
圖4-27c:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到第二型斷裂模式(1000X)---------------------69
圖4-28:第三型:內聚式牙釉質斷裂的示意圖--------------------------------------------70
圖4-29:在掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到托架拆除後的牙齒表面有裂紋-----------70
圖4-30:在掃描式電子顯微鏡下牙釉稜柱斷裂圖---------------------------------------71
圖4-31:第四型:斷裂在陶瓷托架和黏著層交界面的示意圖--------------------------71
圖4-32:立體光學顯微鏡下觀察到Clarity矯正托架第四型斷裂---------------------72
圖4-33:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Clarity托架有第四型斷裂(27X)--------------72
圖4-34:立體光學顯微鏡下觀察到Inspire Ice矯正托架有第四型斷裂-------------73
圖4-35a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Inspire Ice托架有第四型斷裂(51X)-------73
圖4-35b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Inspire Ice托架有第四型斷裂(250X)------74
圖4-35c:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Inspire Ice托架有第四型斷裂(1000X)-----74
圖4-36:第五型:斷裂在黏著層和牙釉質交界面的示意圖-----------------------------75
圖4-37:光學立體顯微鏡下觀察到Inspire托架第五型斷裂---------------------------75
圖4-38a:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Clarity托架有第五型斷裂(28X)------------76
圖4-38b:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察到Clarity托架有第五型斷裂(1200X)--------76
圖5-1:Inspire、Inspire Ice和pre-cracked Inspire,去鍵結所需力量的箱型圖-------77
圖5-2:Clarity和pre-cracked Clarity,去鍵結所需力量的箱型圖----------------------77
圖5-3:陶瓷托架在不同斷裂模式下斷裂個數的雷達圖-------------------------------78
圖6-1:Clarity托架使用之模具:綠線為施力臂,紅線為受力臂-----------------------79
圖6-2:拆除Clarity托架之施力方向、及其力臂的示意圖------------------------------79
圖6-3a:全新的Inspire托架發現有固位球體的缺失(28X)-----------------------------80
圖6-3b:全新的Inspire矯正托架固位球體缺失的放大圖(250X)---------------------80
圖6-4a:全新的Inspire Ice托架發現有固位球體的缺失(28X)------------------------81
圖6-4b:全新的Inspire Ice矯正托架在固位球體的缺失(250X)-----------------------81
圖6-5a:Inspire托架的底部固位球體有80%以上都和托架底分離(30X)----------82
圖6-5b:由牙齒面觀察可發現托架底部的球體留在牙齒表面(30X)-----------------82
圖6-6a:Inspire托架的底部固位球體全部都和托架底分離(28X)--------------------83
圖6-6b:Inspire托架的底部固位球體和托架底分離處的放大(300X)---------------83
圖6-7a:臨床使用Inspire Ice在托架翼使用結紮線的部位發生托架斷裂----------84
圖6-7b:移除結紮線後,觀察Inspire Ice托架的托架斷裂情形----------------------84
圖6-8:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架的第四型斷裂模式可分為兩種型態(51X)-------85
圖6-9a:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架當托架底部球體留在牙齒表面(250X)----------85
圖6-9b:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架當托架底部球體留在牙齒表面(1000X)--------86
圖6-10a:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架球體和托架底部脫離的情形(290X)-------------86
圖6-10b:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架球體和托架底部脫離的情形(890X)-------------87
圖6-10c:Inspire和Inspire Ice托架球體和托架底部脫離的情形(250X)-------------87
圖6-11a:Clarity的第四型斷裂模式有兩種型態(30X)----------------------------------88
圖6-11b:Clarity的固位層和托架底分離而留在牙齒表面的情形(250X)-----------88
圖6-12a:由Clarity托架底部觀察到固位層和托架底分離的情形(30X)------------89
圖6-12b:由Clarity托架底部觀察到固位層和托架底分離的情形(255X)-----------89
圖6-13a:Clarity矯正托架的垂直去鍵結溝槽處發生斷裂(27X)----------------------90
圖6-13b:Clarity矯正托架的垂直去鍵結溝槽處發生斷裂的放大圖(250X)--------90
圖6-14a:Clarity托架發生部分去鍵結(31X)----------------------------------------------91
圖6-14b:Clarity托架發生部分去鍵結處的放大圖(115X)-----------------------------91
圖6-15:Clarity矯正托架發生沿著垂直去鍵結溝槽以及主線溝槽處斷裂---------92
圖6-16a:Clarity托架在垂直去鍵結溝槽處發生斷裂(96X)----------------------------92
圖6-16b:Clarity托架在垂直去鍵結溝槽處發生斷裂(1100X)-------------------------93
圖6-17:Inspire托架斷裂,碎片卻沒有殘留在牙齒表面--------------------------------93
圖6-18:掃描式電子顯微鏡下觀察黏著層呈現一圓弧鼓出的型態------------------94
圖6-19:以超音波製作預裂,可引導斷裂的方向之示意圖----------------------------94

表次

表4-1:本實驗所使用的陶瓷矯正托架-----------------------------------------------------95
表5-1:以手操作去鍵結,Inspire托架的原始數據---------------------------------------96
表5-2:以手操作去鍵結,Inspire托架的計分數值---------------------------------------97
表5-3:以手操作去鍵結,Inspire Ice托架的原始數據-----------------------------------98
表5-4:以手操作去鍵結,Inspire Ice托架的計分數值-----------------------------------99
表5-5:以手操作去鍵結,Clarity托架的原始數據--------------------------------------100
表5-6:以手操作去鍵結,Clarity托架的計分數值--------------------------------------101
表5-7:以手操作去鍵結,三種陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式上的發生比例和斷裂情形-------------------------------------------------------------------------------102
表5-8:以手操作去鍵結,三種陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式佔最大部分的型態----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------102
表5-9:以手操作去鍵結,三種陶瓷托架的ARI計分的分佈和統計結果-------103
表5-10:以手操作去鍵結,托架斷裂位置的統計---------------------------------------103
表5-11:以手操作去鍵結,去鍵結後托架斷裂情形的計分--------------------------104
表5-12:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Inspire托架的原始數據------------------------------105
表5-13:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Inspire托架的計分數值------------------------------106
表5-14:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Inspire Ice托架的原始數據--------------------------107
表5-15:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Inspire Ice托架的計分數值--------------------------108
表5-16:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Clarity托架的原始數據------------------------------109
表5-17:標準化去鍵結的步驟,Clarity托架的計分數值------------------------------110
表5-18:標準化去鍵結的步驟,比較不同廠牌陶瓷托架去鍵結所需要的力量大小和其敘述統計的結果-------------------------------------------------------------111
表5-19:標準化去鍵結步驟,三種陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式上的發生比例和斷裂情形----------------------------------------------------------------------------111
表5-20:標準化去鍵結步驟,三種陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式佔最大部分的型態-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------112
表5-21:標準化去鍵結步驟,三種陶瓷托架的ARI計分的分佈和統計結果------112
表5-22:標準化去鍵結步驟,托架斷裂位置的統計-----------------------------------113
表5-23:標準化去鍵結步驟,去鍵結後托架斷裂情形的計分------------------------113
表5-24:pre-cracked Inspire托架的原始數據--------------------------------------------114
表5-25:pre-cracked Inspire托架的計分數值--------------------------------------------115
表5-26:pre-cracked Clarity托架的原始數據--------------------------------------------116
表5-27:pre-cracked Clarity托架的計分數值--------------------------------------------117
表5-28:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架去鍵結所需要的力量大小和其敘述統計的結果--------------------------------------------------------------------------118
表5-29:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式上的發生比例和斷裂情形--------------------------------------------------------------------------118
表5-30:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架在五種型態斷裂模式中佔最大部分的型態--------------------------------------------------------------------------------119
表5-31:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架的ARI計分的分佈和統計結果---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------119
表5-32:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架在托架斷裂位置的統計---------120
表5-33:比較有無做過超音波預裂的陶瓷托架在去鍵結後托架斷裂情形的計分---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------120
表6-1:比較有無作過預裂的Inspire托架和Clarity托架在不希望發生的斷裂模式上的比較-------------------------------------------------------------------------121
第八章:參考文獻

Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984;85:330-40
Azzeh E, Feldon PJ. Laser debonding of ceramic brackets: a comprehensive review. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;123(1):79-83
Bishara SE, Trulove TS. Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: Part 1. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990a;98:145-53
Bishara SE, Trulove TS. Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990b; 98:263-73
Bishara SE, Fonseca JM, Boyer DB. The use of debonding pliers in the removal of ceramic brackets: force levels and enamel cracks. Am J Orthod Denrofacial Orthop. 108:242-8, 1995
Bishara SE, Fehr DE. Ceramic brackets: something old, something new, a review. Semin Orthod 1997;3:178-88
Bishara SE, Olsen ME, Von Wald L. Evaluation of debonding characteristics of a new collapsible ceramic bracket. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:552-9
Bishara SE, Olsen ME, Von Wald L, Jakobsen JR. Comparison of the debonding characteristics of two innovative ceramic bracket designs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116:86-92
Boyer DB, Engelhardt G, Bishara SE. Debonding orthodontic ceramic brackets by ultrasonic instrumentation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 ;108(3):262-6.
Britton JC, McInnes P, Weinberg R, Ledoux WR, Retief DH. Shear bond strength pf ceramic orthodontic brackets to enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:348-353
Brown RL, Rodriguez MS. Tensile strength and modulus of elasticity of tooth structure and several restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;64:378-87
Diaz C, Swartz M. Debonding a new ceramic bracket: a clinical study. J Clin Orthod 2004;38(8):442-5
Eliades T, Viazis AD, Eliades G. Bonding of ceramic brackets to enamel: Morphologic and structural considerations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;99: 369-375
Fehr DE. A comparative study of the debonding strengths of different ceramic brackets, enamel conditioners, adhesives and debonding blades. MSc thesis. Iowa city: University of Iowa, 1991
Ghosh J, Nanda RS, Duncanson MG Jr, Currier GF. Ceramic bracket design: an analysis using the finite element method. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;108:575-82
Guess MB, Watanabe LG, Beck FM, Grall MG. The effect of Silane coupling agents on the bond strength of a polycrystalline ceramic bracket. J Clin Orthod 1988;22:788-92
Gwinnett AJ, Gorelick L. Microscopic evaluation of enamel after debonding: Clinical application. Am J Orthod 1977;71:652-65
Iwanoto H. Bond strength of new ceramic bracket enhanced by silane coating. J Jpn Orthod Soc 1987;46:547-57
Jeiroudi TM. Enamel fracture caused by ceramic brackets, Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1991;99:97-9
Joseph VP, Rossouw E. The shear bond strengths of stainless steel and ceramic brackets used with chemically and light-activated composite resins. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;97:121-5
Klocke A, Korbmacher HM, Huck LG, Ghosh J, Kahl-Nieke B. Plasma arc curing of ceramic brackets: An evaluation of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;124:309-15
Larmour CJ, Chadwick RG. Effects of a commercial orthodontic debonding agent upon the surface microhardness of two orthodontic bonding resins. Journal of Dentistry 1995;23:37-40
Larmour CJ, McCabe JF, Gordon PH. An ex vivo investigation into the effects of chemical solvents on the debond behaviour of ceramic orthodontic brackets. Br J Orthod 1998;25(1):35-9
Larmour CJ, McCabe JF, Gordon PH. Notching of orthodontic bonding resin to facilitate ceramic bracket debond--an ex vivo investigation. Br J Orthod 1998;25(4):289-91
Martin H, Cunningham W, Norris JP, Cotton WR. Ultrasonic versus hand filling of dentin: a quantitative study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1980;49:79-81
Maskeroni AJ, Meyers CE, Lorton L. Ceramic bracket bonding: A comparison of bond strength with polyacrylic acid and polyphoric acid enamel conditioning. Am J Orthod 1990;97:168-75
Mundstock KS, Sadowsky PL, Lacefield W, Bae S. An in vitro evaluation of a metal reinforced orthodontic ceramic bracket. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;116:635-41
Odegaard J, Segner D. Shear bond strengths of metal brackets compared with a new ceramic bracket. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94: 201-206
Redd TB, Shivapuja PK. Debonding ceramic brackets: Effects on enamel. J Clin Orthod 1991;15: 475-481
Retief DH. Failure at the dental adhesive-etched enamel interface. J Oral Rehabil 1974;1;265-84
Retief DH, Denys FR. Finishing of enamel surface after debonding of orthodontic attachments. Angle Orthod 1979;49:1-10
Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1979;2:171-8
Richman MJ. The use of ultrasonics in root canal therapy and root resection. J Dent Med 1957;12:12-8
Rueggenberg FA, Lockwood P. Thermal debracketing of orthodontics resins. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1990;98: 56-65
Scott GE. Fracture toughness and surface cracks: The key to understanding ceramic brackets. Angle Orthod 1988;58:5-8
Sheridan JJ, Brawley G, Hastings J. Electrothermal debracketing. Part 1: As in vitro study, Am J Orthod 1986a;89:21-7
Sheridan JJ, Brawley G, Hastings J. Electrothermal debracketing. Part 2: As in vitro study, Am J Orthod 1986b;89:141-45
Sinha PK, Nanda RS. The effect of different bonding and debonding techniques on debonding ceramic orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;112: 132-7
Storm E. Debonding ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod 1990; 24:91-94
Strobl K, Bahns TL, Willham L, Bishara SE, Stalley WC. Laser-aided debonding of orthodontic ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992;101;152-8
Suppipat N. Ultrasonics in periodontics. J Clin Periodon 1974;1:206-13
Swartz ML. Ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod 1988;22:82-8
Swartz ML. Ormco Corporation: A technical bulletin on the issue of bonding and debonding ceramic brackets. #070-5039, 1988
Theodorakopoulou LP, Sadowsky PL, Jacobson A, Lcefield W. Evaluation of the debonding characteristics of 2 ceramic brackets: An in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004;125:329-36
Theodore E, Anthony DV, Maria L. Failure mode analysis of ceramic brackets bonded to enamel, Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993;104:21-6
Tocchio R, Williams PT, Mayer F. Laser debonding of sapphire orthodontic brackets. J Dent Res 1989;68:993 (abstr. 1007)
Waldron M, Causton BE. A study of the fracture toughness of a light cured adhesive. J Dent Res 1991;70:696 (abstr. 218)
Waldron M. An introduction into the fracture toughness of a light cured orthodontic adhesive. MSc thesis. University of London, 1991
Walmsley AD. Ultrasound and root canal treatment: the need for scientific evaluation. Int Endod J 1987;20:105-11
Winchester LJ. Bond strengths of five different ceramic brackets: an in-vitro study. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:293-305
Zach I, Cohen G. Pulp response to externally applied heat. Oral surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol 1965;19:515-530
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔