Assessment of preparation time and 1-year Invisalign aligner attachment survival using flowable and packable composites: A split-mouth clinical study

被引:21
作者
Lin, Shuang [1 ]
Huang, Ling [1 ]
Li, Jialing [1 ]
Wen, Juan [1 ]
Mei, Li [2 ]
Xu, Haipeng [3 ]
Zhang, Lu [1 ]
Li, Huang [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Univ, Med Sch, Dept Orthodont, Nanjing Stomatol Hosp, Nanjing, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Otago, Discipline Orthodont, Dept Oral Sci, Sir John Walsh Res Inst,Fac Dent, Dunedin, New Zealand
[3] Nanjing Med Univ, Dept Clin Med, Res Inst, Affiliated Hosp 1, Nanjing, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Clear aligner; Attachment; Damage; Flowable composite; Packable composite; RESIN;
D O I
10.2319/063020-598.1
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: To compare preparation time and 1-year Invisalign aligner attachment survival between a flowable composite (FC) and a packable composite (PC). Materials and Methods: Fifty-five participants (13 men and 42 women, mean age 6 SD: 24.2 6 5.9 years) were included in the study. Ipsilateral quadrants (ie, maxillary and mandibular right, or vice versa) of attachments were randomly assigned to the FC group (Filtek Z350XT Flowable Restorative) and the PC group (Filtek Z350XT Universal Restorative) by tossing a coin. The primary outcome was preparation time. The secondary outcome was time to the first damage of an attachment. Preparation times were compared using the paired t-test, and the survival data were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model with a shared frailty term, with alpha = .05. Results: The preparation times were significantly shorter with the FC (6.22 +/- 0.22 seconds per attachment) than with the PC (32.83 +/- 2.16 seconds per attachment; P,.001). The attachment damage rates were 14.79% for the FC and 9.70% for the PC. According to the Cox models, attachment damage was not significantly affected by the attachment material, sex, arch, tooth location, attachment type, presence of overbite, or occurrence of tooth extraction. Conclusions: The use of a FC may save time as compared with the use of a PC. With regard to attachment survival, there was no significant difference between the two composites. None of the covariates of attachment materials (sex, arch, tooth location, attachment type, presence of overbite, oir occurrence of tooth extraction) affected attachment damage.
引用
收藏
页码:583 / 589
页数:7
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   The association between patient's compliance and age with the bonding failure of orthodontic brackets: a cross-sectional study [J].
Barbosa, Isabela Vasconcelos ;
Ladewig, Victor de Miranda ;
Almeida-Pedrin, Renata Rodrigues ;
Cardoso, Mauricio Almeida ;
Santiago Junior, Joel Ferreira ;
de Castro Ferreira Conti, Ana Claudia .
PROGRESS IN ORTHODONTICS, 2018, 19
[2]  
Barreda Graciela J, 2017, Acta odontol. latinoam., V30, P90
[3]  
Elkholy F, 2019, J OROFAC ORTHOP, V80, P315, DOI 10.1007/s00056-019-00193-7
[4]   Comparative assessment of bonding time and 1-year bracket survival using flash-free and conventional adhesives for orthodontic bracket bonging: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial [J].
Grunheid, Thorsten ;
Larson, Brent E. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2018, 154 (05) :621-628
[5]   Twelve-month bracket failure rate with amorphous calcium phosphate bonding system [J].
Hammad, Shaza M. ;
El Banna, Mai S. ;
Elsaka, Shaymaa E. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2013, 35 (05) :622-627
[6]   A comparison of treatment effectiveness between clear aligner and fixed appliance therapies [J].
Ke, Yunyan ;
Zhu, Yanfei ;
Zhu, Min .
BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2019, 19 (1)
[7]  
Krishnan Sindhuja, 2017, Dental Press J. Orthod., V22, P69, DOI 10.1590/2177-6709.22.2.069-076.oar
[8]  
Mantovani E, 2019, J OROFAC ORTHOP, V80, P79, DOI 10.1007/s00056-018-00167-1
[9]  
Millett DT, 2000, ANGLE ORTHOD, V70, P233
[10]   Comparing orthodontic bond failures of light-cured composite resin with chemical-cured composite resin: A 12-month clinical trial [J].
Mohammed, Rufaida E. ;
Abass, Shaza ;
Abubakr, Neamat H. ;
Mohammed, Zakariya M. S. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2016, 150 (02) :290-294