Ortodontik şeffaf plak materyal ve kalınlık farklılıklarının ankraj ataşmanına uyumunun karşılaştırılması: Bir in vitro çalışma
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2023
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Hatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Giriş ve Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı kalınlık ve materyalden üretilen ortodontik şeffaf plakların rektanguler ankraj ataşmanına uyumunun in vitro olarak karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada her bir grupta 10; toplam 40 adet CA Clear Aligner marka şeffaf plak materyali kullanılmıştır. Master model üzerinde birinci ve ikinci küçük azı dişlerine aynı formda iki adet vertikal rektanguler ataşman yerleştirilerek her bir grupta 10 plak üzerinde toplam 20 ataşmanın uyumu değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmada; 0,5mm CA-Soft, 0,625 mm CA-Medium, 0,75 mm CA-Hard PET-G ve 0,75 mm CA PRO-Hard ABA Three Layer Material olmak üzere 4 farklı materyal ve kalınlıkta plak kullanılmıştır. Plaklar tek bir rezin modele basılmış; ölçümler için mikro bilgisayarlı tomografi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Üç boyutlu (3B) analiz için ataşman ile plak arasındaki hava boşluğu hacmi; iki boyutlu (2B) analizler için de frontal, sagital ve transversal düzlemde ataşmanın başladığı, bittiği ve ortanca kesitte 8 noktada ataşman ile plak arasındaki mesafe ölçülmüştür. Sonrasında ölçülen 8 noktanın ortalaması alınarak o kesitin ortalama boşluk genişliği (OBG) hesaplanmış ve karşılaştırmalar yapılmıştır. Gruplar arası karşılaştırmalar tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD çoklu karşılaştırma testleri ile yapılmıştır. Grup içinde tekrarlayan ölçümlerde karşılaştırmalar ANOVA ve LSD testi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: 3B analiz sonuçlarına göre ataşman-şeffaf plak arasında kalan boşluk hacmi açısından gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunmamaktadır. 2B analiz sonuçlarına göre frontal düzlemde; palatinal kesitte CA PRO-Hard grubunda OBG diğer gruplardan daha düşüktür. Grup içi kıyaslamalarda; tüm çalışma gruplarında bukkal kesitin OBG palatinal kesite göre daha düşük bulunmuştur. Sagital düzlemde; mezial kesitte gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmamaktadır. Sagitomedian ve distal kesitte CA PRO-Hard grubunda OBG; diğer gruplardan daha düşük bulunmuştur. Grup içi kıyaslamalarda; CA PRO-Hard grubunda kesitler arasında OBG açısından fark gözlemlenmemiştir. Diğer gruplarda mezial ve distal kesit OBG; sagitomedian kesite göre daha düşük bulunmuştur. Transversal düzlemde; gingival ve transversomedian kesitte CA PRO-Hard grubunda OBG diğer çalışma gruplarına göre daha düşük bulunmuştur. Oklüzal kesitte gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmamaktadır. Grup içi kıyaslamalarda; CA-Soft, CA-Medium ve CA-Hard grubunda oklüzal kesitten gingival kesite doğru daha büyük OBG gözlemlenmiştir. CA PRO-Hard grubunda OBG gingival kesit, oklüzal kesite göre daha düşük bulunmuştur. Düzlem ortalamalarında ise gruplar arasında, her üç düzlemde de CA PRO Hard grubu OBG diğer gruplara göre daha düşük bulunmuştur. Sonuç: 3B analiz sonuçlarına göre tüm gruplarda plak-ataşman uyumu birbirine benzer bulunmuştur. 2B analiz sonuçlarına göre genel olarak diş-ataşman birleşiminde ve gingival bölgede uyum kaybı gözlemlenmiştir. CA PRO-Hard tüm ataşman yüzeylerinde daha iyi uyum göstermiştir.
Introduction and Aim: The aim of this study was to compare in vitro the fitting of orthodontic clear aligners of different thicknesses and materials to the anchorage attachment. Material and Methods: In the study, 10 in each group and a total of 40 CA Clear Aligner brand clear aligners were used. Two vertical rectangular attachments of the same form were placed on the first and second premolars on the master model and the fitting (gap between aligners and tooth surface) of a total of 20 attachments on 10 plates in each group was evaluated. In the study; 4 different aligners were used; 0.5mm CA-Soft, 0.625 mm CA-Medium, 0.75 mm CA-Hard PET-G and 0.75 mm CA PRO-Hard ABA Three Layer Material. The aligners were printed on a single resin model and the micro-computed tomography method was used to measure the air gap volume and gap width between the clear aligner and the attachment. For three-dimensional (3D) analysis, the air gap between the attachment and the aligner was measured; for two-dimensional (2D) analysis, the distance between the attachment and the aligner was measured at 8 points at the beginning, ending and median section of the attachment in the frontal, sagittal and transversal planes. The average gap width (AGW) of that section was then measured by averaging the 8 measured points. Comparisons between groups were made with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD multiple comparison tests. Within-group comparisons in repeated measurements were evaluated by ANOVA and LSD test. Results: According to the 3D analysis results, there is no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of the gap volume between the attachment and the clear aligner. According to the 2D analysis results, in the frontal plane; AGW in the CA PRO-Hard group in the palatinal section is lower than the other groups. In within-group comparisons, the OBG of the buccal section was found to be lower than the palatinal section in all study groups. In the sagittal plane; there is no statistically significant difference between the groups in the mesial section. In the sagitomedian and distal sections, AGW in the CA PRO-Hard group was found to be lower than the other groups. In within-group comparisons, no difference was observed in terms of AGW between sections in the CA PRO Hard group. In other groups, mesial and AGW of distal section was found to be lower than sagitomedian section. In the transversal plane; in the gingival and transversomedian sections, AGW was found to be lower in the CA PRO-Hard group compared to the other study groups. In within-group comparisons, OBG gingival section was found to be lower than occlusal section in CA PRO-Hard group. In the other groups, a larger OBG was observed from occlusal to gingival sections. In the plane averages, AGW of CA PRO Hard group was found to be lower than the other groups in all three planes. Conclusion: According to the 3D analysis results, the fitting of all groups was similar to each other. According to the results of the 2D analysis, a loss of fitting was generally observed at the tooth-attachment junction and in the gingival area. CA PRO-Hard showed a better fitting on all attachment surfaces.
Introduction and Aim: The aim of this study was to compare in vitro the fitting of orthodontic clear aligners of different thicknesses and materials to the anchorage attachment. Material and Methods: In the study, 10 in each group and a total of 40 CA Clear Aligner brand clear aligners were used. Two vertical rectangular attachments of the same form were placed on the first and second premolars on the master model and the fitting (gap between aligners and tooth surface) of a total of 20 attachments on 10 plates in each group was evaluated. In the study; 4 different aligners were used; 0.5mm CA-Soft, 0.625 mm CA-Medium, 0.75 mm CA-Hard PET-G and 0.75 mm CA PRO-Hard ABA Three Layer Material. The aligners were printed on a single resin model and the micro-computed tomography method was used to measure the air gap volume and gap width between the clear aligner and the attachment. For three-dimensional (3D) analysis, the air gap between the attachment and the aligner was measured; for two-dimensional (2D) analysis, the distance between the attachment and the aligner was measured at 8 points at the beginning, ending and median section of the attachment in the frontal, sagittal and transversal planes. The average gap width (AGW) of that section was then measured by averaging the 8 measured points. Comparisons between groups were made with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD multiple comparison tests. Within-group comparisons in repeated measurements were evaluated by ANOVA and LSD test. Results: According to the 3D analysis results, there is no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of the gap volume between the attachment and the clear aligner. According to the 2D analysis results, in the frontal plane; AGW in the CA PRO-Hard group in the palatinal section is lower than the other groups. In within-group comparisons, the OBG of the buccal section was found to be lower than the palatinal section in all study groups. In the sagittal plane; there is no statistically significant difference between the groups in the mesial section. In the sagitomedian and distal sections, AGW in the CA PRO-Hard group was found to be lower than the other groups. In within-group comparisons, no difference was observed in terms of AGW between sections in the CA PRO Hard group. In other groups, mesial and AGW of distal section was found to be lower than sagitomedian section. In the transversal plane; in the gingival and transversomedian sections, AGW was found to be lower in the CA PRO-Hard group compared to the other study groups. In within-group comparisons, OBG gingival section was found to be lower than occlusal section in CA PRO-Hard group. In the other groups, a larger OBG was observed from occlusal to gingival sections. In the plane averages, AGW of CA PRO Hard group was found to be lower than the other groups in all three planes. Conclusion: According to the 3D analysis results, the fitting of all groups was similar to each other. According to the results of the 2D analysis, a loss of fitting was generally observed at the tooth-attachment junction and in the gingival area. CA PRO-Hard showed a better fitting on all attachment surfaces.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Diş Hekimliği, Dentistry, şeffaf plak uyumu, ataşman, mikro-bt, clear aligner fitting, attachment, micro-ct
