论文部分内容阅读
目的:通过体外pH循环实验,找到一种临床效果较好的邻面去釉方法。方法:收集因正畸减数治疗的前磨牙50颗,沿牙体长轴纵向剖开,得到100个样本,随机分为5组。Ⅰ组为片切砂条,Ⅱ组为片切盘,Ⅲ组为片切砂条+抛光+35%磷酸,Ⅳ组为片切盘+抛光+35%磷酸,Ⅴ组为未去釉组。每组样本经过体外pH循环30 d后,采用扫描电镜及显微硬度仪检测,采用SPSS13.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果:①各组的显微硬度值两两比较,Ⅰ组与Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组与Ⅳ组间无显著差异(P>0.05);Ⅰ组与Ⅲ组、Ⅰ组与Ⅳ组、Ⅱ组与Ⅲ组、Ⅱ组与Ⅳ组有高度显著差异(P<0.01);Ⅰ组与Ⅴ组、Ⅱ组与Ⅴ组、Ⅲ组与Ⅴ组、Ⅳ组与Ⅴ组间差异显著(P<0.05)。②肉眼及扫描电镜观察,Ⅲ组及Ⅳ组无明显不同,但均优于其余几组。结论:①去釉盘和去釉砂条的去釉效果无显著不同。②化学抛光组的再矿化效果优于未抛光组及对照组。③邻面去釉后釉质表面的划痕,即使经再矿化也难以恢复。
OBJECTIVE: To find out a better clinical effect of enamel removal by pH cycling experiments in vitro. Methods: 50 premolar teeth treated by orthodontic reduction were collected and cut longitudinally along the long axis of the tooth. 100 samples were randomly divided into 5 groups. Group Ⅰ was sliced sand slice, group Ⅱ was sliced disk, group Ⅲ was sliced sand slice + polished + 35% phosphoric acid, group Ⅳ sliced disk + polished + 35% phosphoric acid, group Ⅴ was non-enamelled group. Each group of samples after in vitro pH cycle for 30 d, using scanning electron microscopy and microhardness testing, using SPSS13.0 software package for statistical analysis. Results: (1) There was no significant difference between group Ⅰ and group Ⅱ, group Ⅲ and group Ⅳ (P> 0.05); Group Ⅰ and group Ⅲ, group Ⅰ and group Ⅳ, group Ⅱ and group Ⅱ There was a significant difference between group Ⅲ and group Ⅱ and group Ⅳ (P <0.01). There was significant difference between group Ⅰ and group Ⅴ, group Ⅱ and group Ⅴ, group Ⅲ and group Ⅴ, group Ⅳ and group Ⅴ (P <0.05). ② The naked eye and scanning electron microscopy, Ⅲ and Ⅳ groups were not significantly different, but were better than the remaining groups. Conclusion: ① There is no significant difference in enamelling effect between de-enamelled and enamelled sand. (2) The remineralization effect of the chemical polishing group is better than that of the non-polishing group and the control group. ③ the enamel surface after the enamel scratches, even after remineralization is difficult to recover.