论文部分内容阅读
目的比较3种氟制剂对邻面去釉后牙釉质再矿化效果的影响,为临床选择预防邻面去釉后牙釉质脱矿的最佳氟制剂提供参考。方法收集正畸减数拔除的前磨牙60颗,行近远中邻面去釉,牙冠颊舌向劈开后共120个标本,随机分为4组。对照组单纯用人工唾液进行再矿化,A组加用0.1 mol/L氟化钠溶液处理,B组加用6 000 mg/L(6 000 ppm)氟化泡沫处理,C组加用氟含量0.1%(质量分数)的氟保护漆处理。每4周处理1次,共处理3次。应用显微硬度仪测量每个标本再矿化前及再矿化后4周去釉面的显微硬度值,并进行统计学分析。结果再矿化前、后牙釉质显微硬度差值在对照组为(3.42±2.27)kg/mm2,A组为(13.06±4.22)kg/mm2,B组为(20.21±4.96)kg/mm2,C组为(16.05±5.51)kg/mm2。各组再矿化前、后的显微硬度变化均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。再矿化前、后显微硬度差值在4组间的差异有统计学意义(F=26.168,P=0.000);两两比较,A、B、C 3组与对照组的差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01),B组和A、C组间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),A组和C组间的差异无统计学意义(q=2.142,P=0.139)。结论氟化钠溶液、氟化泡沫、氟保护漆对去釉后的牙釉质再矿化均具有良好的促进作用,其中氟化泡沫的效果优于其他2种制剂。
Objective To compare the effects of three fluoride preparations on the remineralization of enamel after enamel on the adjacent surfaces, and to provide a reference for choosing the best fluoride preparation for preventing the enamel demineralization on the adjacent surfaces after enamel removal. Methods Sixty premolar teeth, extracted by orthodontics and subtraction, were collected. There were 120 specimens of near-far mid-enamel and 120 teeth of the crown after cleavage. They were randomly divided into 4 groups. The control group was remineralized with artificial saliva only. Group A was treated with 0.1 mol / L sodium fluoride solution, Group B was treated with fluorinated foam at 6 000 mg / L (6 000 ppm), Group C was treated with fluoride 0.1% (mass fraction) fluorine protective paint treatment. Deal once every 4 weeks for 3 times. The microhardness of each sample before remineralization and 4 weeks after remineralization was measured by microhardness tester, and the statistical analysis was performed. Results Before and after remineralization, the difference of microhardness of post enamel was (3.42 ± 2.27) kg / mm2 in control group, (13.06 ± 4.22) kg / mm2 in group A and (20.21 ± 4.96) kg / mm2 in group B , And group C was (16.05 ± 5.51) kg / mm2. The microhardness of each group before and after remineralization had statistical significance (P <0.01). The difference of microhardness before and after remineralization was statistically significant among the four groups (F = 26.168, P = 0.000). The differences between groups A, B, C and control were statistically significant (P <0.01). The difference between group A and group C was statistically significant (P <0.01). There was no significant difference between group A and group C (q = 2.142, P = 0.139). Conclusion Sodium fluoride solution, fluorinated foam and fluorinated protective paint have good enamel remineralization after enameling. The fluorinated foam is better than the other two preparations.