自锁托槽及弓丝材质对转矩效能的影响

目的探讨自锁托槽系统与不同弓丝组合的转矩效能的差异及变化规律。方法分别测试2种被动自锁托槽系统（Damon3、SmartClip）、2种主动自锁托槽系统（Time2、OPA—K）与2种弓丝（0．019×0．025英寸镍钛方丝、0．019×0．025英寸不锈钢方丝）组合的转矩效能。结果（1）除了SmartCliD与Damon3自锁托槽（P=1．000）、OPA—K与Time2自锁托槽（P=0．999）的转矩效能间差异无统计学意义外．其他自锁托槽间的转矩效能的差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．001）;（2）0．019×0．025英寸镍钛方丝、0．019×0．025英寸不锈钢方丝相同自锁托槽组间转矩效能的差异有统计学意义（P〈0．001）。结论被动自锁托槽的转矩效能明显低于主动自锁托槽,不同弓丝转矩效能的差异与边缘斜面有关。     

牵引力大小对关闭间隙时滑动阻力影响的三维非线性有限元研究

目的探讨滑动法关闭间隙时牵引力大小对弓丝滑动的影响。方法在全牙列及其牙周组织、弓丝、矫治器的三维有限元模型上,用非线性方法计算不同大小牵引力作用下沿0．048cm×0．064cm（0．019英寸×0．025英寸）不锈钢弓丝滑动时,弓丝与托槽的接触点数目、接触力大小等影响滑动摩擦力大小的因素。结果牵引力小于或大于150g时,后牙接触点多、接触正压力大,滑动阻力较大,使滑动受限;150g牵引力时,整段弓丝特别是后段弓丝与托槽接触点均匀,后段弓丝接触正压力最小,滑动阻力最小。结论使用0．048cm×0．064cm（0．019英寸×0．025英寸）不锈钢弓丝滑动关闭间隙时,过小、过大的牵引力均不利于弓丝的滑动,150g力时滑动阻力最小,有利于弓丝的滑动。     

两种不同弹力结扎对滑动摩擦力大小影响的体外实验研究

目的通过体外实验研究MBT金属托槽应用两种不同的弹力结扎时滑动摩擦力的大小。方法选择3M公司的上颌第二双尖牙MBTmini金属托槽和0．46×0．64mm（0．018×0．025英寸）不锈钢弓丝,分别采用意大利Leone公司生产的Slide^TM结扎圈和美国TP公司生产的传统弹力圈结扎,应用自行设计开发的摩擦力测试仪,弓丝沿托槽低速滑动,并在滑动中保持特定的托槽——弓丝成角,共计12个角度。测量每一种弓丝、不同角度下的滑动摩擦力大小。结果在被动状态下两种结扎方式的滑动摩擦力均基本保持不变,Slide^TM结扎的摩擦力非常小,几乎可以忽略不计;在主动状态下,摩擦力随角度增加而增大,slide^TM结扎产生的滑动摩擦力仍明显小于传统弹力结扎。结论应用LeoneSlide^TM结扎圈,可以显著减小矫治器的滑动摩擦力。     

后牙段正畸托槽与弓丝间的摩擦阻力研究

在直丝弓矫正技术中用滑动机制内收切牙是临床上广为流行的手段。在正畸力作用下弓丝沿着托槽和额面管向远中滑动，而后牙段托槽及颊面管与弓丝之间的摩擦力会妨碍这种牙齿移动，所以尽力减小摩擦力就可以最大程度地维护磨牙支抗。本实验用Instr。n测试仪来研究三种0．022系统的直丝弓托槽（分别为标准直丝托槽、Act卜a直丝托槽和SPeed直丝托槽）与五种正畸弓丝之间的摩擦力，（五种弓丝分别为0．018、0．020的圆丝和0016X0．022、0·018X0．025、0．019X0．025的方丝）体外实验的装置模拟第一双尖牙拔除后尖牙已与第二双尖牙靠拢开始内…     

自锁托槽和传统托槽摩擦力的实验研究

目的:测量自锁托槽和传统托槽与正畸弓丝成不同接触角角度时沿着各种弓丝滑动时所需克服的摩擦力大小,分析托槽、接触角、弓丝材料对弓丝与托槽之间摩擦力的影响.方法:本实验用于检测的托槽包括自锁托槽(DamonⅢ,In-ovation)和传统金属直丝弓托槽,所有托槽均选用上颌第一前磨牙托槽.应用Instron8841万能材料测试机测量托槽沿着各种弓丝(0.016in镍钛丝、0.016in澳丝、0.018×0.025in镍钛丝、0.018×0.025in不锈钢丝)滑动时摩擦力的大小.改变托槽与弓丝之间的角度,测量托槽与弓丝成不同角度时(0°、3°、6°、9°)摩擦力的大小.结果:自锁托槽的摩擦力在各种角度下均明显小于传统托槽.随着接触角的增加,自锁托槽和传统托槽摩擦力均增大,不锈钢丝和澳丝比镍钛丝摩擦力增加得更迅速.结论:托槽的类型、弓丝的材料和尺寸、接触角的变化对弓丝与托槽间摩擦力有显著的影响.自锁托槽能明显减小摩擦力.     

不同结扎方式对舌侧托槽静摩擦力的影响

目的：探讨在不同结扎方式下,舌侧托槽在牙弓后段所产生静摩擦力的差异。方法：测试2种舌侧托槽系统（STb、e·Brace）与4种弓丝（0．016英寸镍钼合金丝、0．016英寸不锈钢圆丝、0．016×0．022英寸镍钼合金丝、、0．016×0．022英寸不锈钢方丝）组合在3种结扎方式下的静摩擦力。结果：不同结扎状态下,舌侧托槽－弓丝间的静摩擦力有显著性差异（P＜0．05）。结论：舌侧托槽－弓丝组合的静摩擦力随结扎力的增大而增大。     

自制美学涂层弓丝摩擦力的实验研究

目的：对自制美学涂层弓丝的摩擦力进行测试,并与普通不锈钢弓丝比较。方法：在干燥条件下,模拟临床牙齿移动,分别测定0．018″美学涂层不锈钢圆丝和0．018″普通不锈钢圆丝与3种美学托槽（陶瓷托槽、树脂托槽、带金属槽沟的陶瓷托槽）组合的摩擦力并进行比较。同时比较与美学涂层弓丝组合时,3种托槽之间的摩擦力大小。结果：在与3种美学托槽组合时,美学涂层不锈钢圆丝与普通不锈钢圆丝的摩擦力虽有不同,但无显著性差异。3种美学托槽与美学涂层弓丝组合时,陶瓷托槽的摩擦力明显大于树脂托槽和带金属槽沟的陶瓷托槽,而后两者之间无统计学差异。结论：此种美学涂层弓丝符合口腔正畸临床使用要求。     

双槽沟托槽滑动阻力的实验研究

目的 评价模拟尖牙滑动时双槽沟托槽的滑动阻力,探讨临床应用双槽沟托槽的合适牵引力.方法 将粘有托槽的人工尖牙置于硅胶槽内,分别在10g、15g和20g力牵引下沿弓丝滑动.双槽沟托槽组中人工尖牙在双圆丝(直径0.016英寸和0.018英寸)支撑下移动.对照组为常规方丝托槽和方丝(0.016英寸×0.022英寸)组合.通过激光测距仪及相连计算机得到的牙齿移动速率,分析牙齿滑动时所受阻力的大小.结果 牵引力为10g力和15g力时,双槽沟托槽组平均移动速率较小.当牵引力增加到20g力,双槽沟托槽组平均速率大于常规托槽组.结论 在足够牵引力的作用下,双槽沟托槽配合双圆丝(直径0.016英寸和0.018英寸)组合的滑动阻力并不比常规托槽和0.016英寸×0.022英寸方丝组合大.     

国产陶瓷托槽与金属弓丝间滑动摩擦力的研究

目的检测体外条件下国产多晶体氧化铝陶瓷托槽与金属弓丝在不同夹角时的滑动摩擦力,为其改良提供参考信息。方法利用摩擦力测量装置检测弓丝与槽沟的夹角分别为0°和5°时,国产陶瓷托槽分别与0.016、0.016×0.022、0.019×0.025英寸不锈钢丝和镍钛丝间的滑动摩擦力,每组样本量为10。对照组为临床常用多晶体氧化铝陶瓷托槽(Crystaline IV)。结果国产陶瓷托槽的摩擦力显著高于Crystaline IV,且除0°夹角、0.016英寸不锈钢圆丝和镍钛圆丝及0.016×0.022英寸不锈钢方丝外,其余情况下两种陶瓷托槽间摩擦力的差异有显著性(P0.01)。镍钛丝产生的摩擦力高于不锈钢丝,弓丝尺寸增加,摩擦力增加,弓丝与槽沟夹角为5°产生的摩擦力高于0°。结论国产陶瓷托槽的摩擦力性能不能满足临床使用的要求,需要进一步改良。     

Lock-loose托槽与传统托槽摩擦力特性的比较研究

目的 在干燥和人工唾液环境中测量Lock-loose托槽结扎中间翼和结扎全翼时与弓丝之间滑动摩擦力和静摩擦力的大小,并与传统四翼托槽和自锁托槽进行对比。方法 应用原子力显微镜观察不锈钢弓丝与不同托槽摩擦前后的表观形貌。选用Lock-loose托槽、传统四翼托槽和自锁托槽,分别与0.406 4 mm、0.457 2 mm不锈钢圆丝和0.457 2 mm×0.634 9 mm、0.482 6 mm×0.634 9 mm不锈钢方丝组合,其中Lock-loose托槽使用结扎中间翼和结扎全翼两种结扎方式。使用电子万能力学实验机测量干燥和人工唾液两种环境下弓丝在托槽内滑动的动、静摩擦力。结果 不同尺寸弓丝与不同托槽摩擦前后的表面粗糙度无明显差异（P>0.05）;Lock-loose托槽结扎中间翼与4种弓丝组合的动、静摩擦力均接近于0,与传统四翼托槽有明显差异（P<0.05）;与0.457 2 mm×0.634 9 mm不锈钢方丝组合时,Lock-loose托槽结扎全翼可以获得最大动、静摩擦力,与传统四翼托槽和自锁托槽的差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;人工唾液环境中的摩擦力小于干燥环境中的摩擦力（P<0.05）。结论 Lock-loose托槽可以通过不同的结扎方式调节并获得临床所需的摩擦力,有效解决了低摩擦力与强支抗控制的矛盾问题。     

Evaluation of friction during sliding tooth movement in various bracket-arch wire combinations.

Frictional forces during simulated sliding tooth movement were measured with a model that was representative of the clinical condition. The model allowed tipping of the tooth until contact was established between the arch wire and diagonally opposite corners of the bracket wings; it also allowed rotation until the wire contacted opposite corners of the ligature tie, or the buccal shield with self-ligating brackets, and the base of the slot. Conventional and self-ligating stainless steel brackets as well as conventional ceramic brackets, and ceramic brackets with a stainless steel slot, all with 0.022 inch bracket slot, were tested with 0.019 x 0.025 inch arch wires of stainless steel, nickel titanium, and beta titanium. Each of the 12 bracket-arch wire combinations was tested 10 times. No significant interaction was detected between brackets and arch wires (P = .89), but the bracket and arch wire effects were significant (P < .001). The pairwise differences between conventional and self-ligating stainless steel brackets and ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot were not significant. However, the conventional ceramic brackets generated significantly higher friction than the other brackets tested. Beta titanium arch wires produced higher frictional forces than nickel titanium arch wires, but no significant differences were found between each of the two and stainless steel arch wires. Attempts to identify differences in surface scratches of the arch wires produced by the different brackets were unsuccessful.     

Evaluation of methods of archwire ligation on frictional resistance

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of elastomeric type and stainless steel (SS) ligation on frictional resistance using a validated method. To assess the validity of the new test system to measure mean frictional forces, SS and TMA wires, each with dimensions of 0.017 x 0.025 and 0.019 x 0.025 inches, were used in combination with a self-ligating Damon II bracket or a conventional preadjusted edgewise premolar SS bracket without ligation. Four types of elastomeric module, purple, grey, Alastik or SuperSlick, and a pre-formed 0.09 inch SS ligature were then assessed as methods of ligation using preadjusted edgewise premolar SS brackets. The specimens were tested on a Nene M3000 testing machine, with a crosshead speed of 5 mm/minute and each test run lasted for 4 minutes. Each bracket/wire combination with each method of ligation was tested 10 times in the presence of human saliva and the mean frictional force was recorded. The mean frictional forces were compared using three-way analysis of variance. The Damon II self-ligating bracket and unligated conventional SS bracket produced negligible mean frictional forces with any of the wires tested. For the 0.017 x 0.025 SS, 0.019 x 0.025 SS or 0.019 x 0.025 inch TMA wires, SS ligatures produced the lowest mean frictional forces. With the 0.017 x 0.025 TMA wire, purple modules produced the lowest mean frictional force. There was no consistent pattern in the mean frictional forces across the various combinations of wire type, size and ligation method. Under the conditions of this experiment, the use of passive self-ligating brackets is the only method of almost eliminating friction.     

Measurements of the torque moment in various archwire-bracket-ligation combinations

The torque moment generated by third-order bends is important for tooth movement. The purpose of this study was to measure the torque moment that can be delivered by various archwire and bracket combinations at the targeted tooth. Stainless steel (SS) upper brackets with 0.018 and 0.022 inch slots, two sizes of nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) alloy wires, and three sizes of SS wires for each bracket were used. The wire was ligated with elastics or wire. The torque moment delivered by the various archwire-bracket-ligation combinations was measured using a torque gauge. Statistical analysis was undertaken using analysis of variance (multiple comparison tests and post hoc using Tukey's honestly significant difference test. The torque moment increased as the degree of torque and wire size increased. There was no significant difference in torque moment between the SS and Ni-Ti wires at lower or higher than 40 degrees torque. The torque moment with wire ligation was significantly larger than that with elastic ligation with 0.016 × 0.022 and 0.017 × 0.025 inch Ni-Ti wires in the 0.018 inch slot brackets and the 0.017 × 0.025 and 0.019 × 0.025 inch SS and Ni-Ti wires in the 0.022 inch slot brackets. However, there was no significant difference in torque moment between either ligation method when using the full slot size wires.     

弓丝与结扎方法对摩擦力影响的实验研究

目的:了解4种弓丝和2种结扎方法对托槽与弓丝摩擦力的影响。方法:在干燥条件下,按正交实验设计,使用LJ-500型拉力实验机的微型测力计,测试4种弓丝与6种直丝托槽组合及采用2种结扎法时在后牙段的动、静摩擦力。所得数据进行方差分析和二次响应回归分析。结果:在弓丝与所有托槽组合中,0.018英寸×0.025英寸(1in=2.54cm)的不锈钢方丝动、静摩擦力最小,0.019英寸×0.025英寸的不锈钢方丝动、静摩擦力最大,0.018与0.020英寸不锈钢圆丝介于两者之间,但0.018英寸圆丝的动摩擦力较大,0.020英寸圆丝的静摩擦力较大。动、静摩擦力平均百分比从小到大依次为:0.019英寸×0.025英寸方丝、0.020英寸圆丝、0.018英寸×0.025英寸方丝、0.018英寸的圆丝。弹力橡皮圈结扎的动、静摩擦力及动、静摩擦力平均百分比均大于不锈钢丝结扎。结论:0.018英寸的不锈钢圆丝不适宜滑动机制;在0.022英寸系统的直丝托槽中,用0.019英寸×0.025英寸不锈钢方丝关闭间隙,应尽可能加强支抗控制;干燥条件下弹力橡皮圈结扎不利于托槽、弓丝滑动。     

Torque Expression in Stainless Steel Orthodontic Brackets: A Systematic Review

Objective:To evaluate the quantitative effects on torque expression of varying the slot size of stainless steel orthodontic brackets and the dimension of stainless steel wire, and to analyze the limitations of the experimental methods used.Materials and Methods:In vitro studies measuring torque expression in conventional and self-ligating stainless steel brackets with a torque-measuring device, with the use of straight stainless steel orthodontic wire without second-order mechanics and without loops, coils, or auxiliary wires, were sought through a systematic review process.Results:Eleven articles were selected. Direct comparison of different studies was limited by differences in the measuring devices used and in the parameters measured. On the basis of the selected studies, in a 0.018 inch stainless steel bracket slot, the engagement angle ranges from 31 degrees with a 0.016 × 0.016 inch stainless steel archwire to 4.6 degrees with a 0.018 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire. In a 0.022 inch stainless steel bracket slot, the engagement angle ranges from 18 degrees with a 0.018 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire to 6 degrees with a 0.021 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire. Active stainless steel self-ligating brackets demonstrate an engagement angle of approximately 7.5 degrees, whereas passive stainless steel self-ligating brackets show an engagement angle of approximately 14 degrees with 0.019 × 0.025 inch stainless steel wire in a 0.022 inch slot.Conclusions:The engagement angle depends on archwire dimension and edge shape, as well as on bracket slot dimension, and is variable and larger than published theoretical values. Clinically effective torque can be achieved in a 0.022 inch bracket slot with archwire torsion of 15 to 31 degrees for active self-ligating brackets and of 23 to 35 degrees for passive self-ligating brackets with a 0.019 × 0.025 inch stainless steel wire.     

A comparative study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and arch wires

An in vitro study of simulated canine retraction was undertaken to evaluate the difference in frictional resistance between stainless steel arch wires and steel and ceramic brackets with elastomeric, steel, and self-ligation. Each bracket slot was 0.018 x 0.025 inch. The arch wires used were 0.014-inch, 0.016-inch, 0.018-inch, 0.016 x 0.016-inch, and 0.016 x 0.22-inch stainless steel. A testing apparatus was designed to attempt to simulate the clinical situation in which teeth tip slightly while they slide along the arch wire. Under these testing conditions, the self-ligating steel bracket did not demonstrate less friction than the elastic or steel-ligated stainless steel brackets. For most wire sizes, elastomer-ligated ceramic brackets demonstrated the greatest friction when compared with other bracket/ligation technique combinations. The clinical significance of this study becomes apparent when stainless steel brackets are used on the posterior teeth and ceramic brackets are used on the anterior teeth. If sliding mechanics are used, the anterior teeth may be more resistant to movement than the posterior teeth because of the greater friction of the ceramic brackets. This could result in more posterior anchorage loss than would be expected if only one type of bracket were used.     

国产3B自锁托槽、3B直丝弓托槽和Damon Q自锁托槽椅旁操作时间的对比研究

目的比较国产3B自锁托槽、Damon Q自锁托槽以及国产3B直丝弓托槽的椅旁操作时间,为国产3B自锁托槽的临床应用提供参考依据。方法选择正畸患者80例,其中20人使用国产3B自锁托槽(3B自锁组),20人使用Damon Q自锁托槽(Damon Q自锁组),20人使用国产3B直丝弓托槽+结扎丝结扎(结扎丝组),20人使用国产3B直丝弓托槽+橡皮圈结扎(橡皮圈组)。待患者上下颌牙列基本排齐后,使用0.018*0.025英寸镍钛方丝入槽,记录全口结扎和拆除时间。采用单因素方差分析,比较4组患者的结扎和拆除时间。结果 3B自锁组的结扎、拆除和总时间均明显短于结扎丝组和橡皮圈组(P<0.01)。3B自锁组和Damon Q自锁组在结扎、拆除和总时间方面的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论无论是采用结扎丝结扎还是橡皮圈结扎,国产3B自锁托槽的椅旁操作时间明显短于直丝弓托槽,且与进口的Damon Q自锁托槽相比无明显统计学差异。     

An in vitro investigation of the influence of self-ligating brackets, low friction ligatures, and archwire on frictional resistance

This study, performed using a specially designed apparatus that included 10 aligned brackets, evaluated the frictional resistance generated by conventional stainless steel (SS) brackets (Victory Series), self-ligating Damon SL II brackets, Time Plus brackets, and low-friction ligatures (Slide) coupled with various SS, nickel-titanium (NiTi), and beta-titanium (TMA) archwires. All brackets had a 0.022-inch slot and the orthodontic wire alloys were 0.016, 0.016 x 0.022, and 0.019 x 0.025 inch NiTi, 0.017 x 0.025 inch TMA, and 0.019 x 0.025 inch SS. Each bracket-archwire combination was tested 10 times. Coupled with 0.016 inch NiTi, Victory brackets generated the most friction and Damon SL II the least (P < 0.001); with 0.016 x 0.022 inch NiTi, the self-ligating brackets (Time and Damon SL II) generated significantly lower friction (P < 0.001) than Victory Series and Slide ligatures; with 0.019 x 0.025 inch SS or 0.019 x 0.025 inch NiTi, Slide ligatures generated significantly lower friction than all other groups. No difference was observed among the four groups when used with a 0.017 x 0.025-inch TMA archwire. These findings suggest that the use of an in vitro testing model that includes 10 brackets provides information about the frictional force of the various bracket-archwire combinations.