不同透明对准剂系统的结构构象比较:一项体外研究

IF 0.5 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Open Dentistry Journal Pub Date : 2022-04-30 DOI:10.3390/dj10050073
Aseel Alhendi, Rita M Khounganian, Raisuddin Ali, S. A. Syed, Abdullazez A. Almudhi
{"title":"不同透明对准剂系统的结构构象比较:一项体外研究","authors":"Aseel Alhendi, Rita M Khounganian, Raisuddin Ali, S. A. Syed, Abdullazez A. Almudhi","doi":"10.3390/dj10050073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to evaluate the structural conformations of three clear aligner systems, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity®, and compare them with the most commonly used system, Invisalign®. Clear aligner samples from Invisalign®, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity® were cut into 5 × 5 mm squares and exposed to artificial saliva for 2 weeks. The specimens were then subjected to a Vickers hardness test by applying three separate indentations with a 25 gf load for 15 s. Hardness was calculated using the following formula: Vickers hardness number = 1.854 (F/D2). Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis was performed, with a diamond hemisphere and infrared beam being allowed to pass through each specimen. A mid-infrared range from 4000 to 375 cm−1 was recorded. The samples were also evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) combined with energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis spectroscopy at different magnifications. No statistically significant differences were observed between the included systems with regard to hardness. All systems showed a polyurethane-based material, as illustrated by the FTIR analysis. Some structural variations were noted in the Invisalign® system, which had a more homogeneous architecture. Statistically significant differences in the carbon weights were found among the systems. The four systems presented comparable hardness levels. Mild molecular composition differences were found, but all systems had the similarity of being composed of a polyurethane-based material. Carbon and oxygen were the main elements, as they were located in all studied clear aligners. The SEM analysis revealed that Invisalign® had a smoother surface than the other three systems. All included clear aligners had similar characteristics with minimal differences, providing a wide variety of options for clinical orthodontic treatment according to patients’ demands.","PeriodicalId":47284,"journal":{"name":"Open Dentistry Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structural Conformation Comparison of Different Clear Aligner Systems: An In Vitro Study\",\"authors\":\"Aseel Alhendi, Rita M Khounganian, Raisuddin Ali, S. A. Syed, Abdullazez A. Almudhi\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/dj10050073\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this study was to evaluate the structural conformations of three clear aligner systems, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity®, and compare them with the most commonly used system, Invisalign®. Clear aligner samples from Invisalign®, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity® were cut into 5 × 5 mm squares and exposed to artificial saliva for 2 weeks. The specimens were then subjected to a Vickers hardness test by applying three separate indentations with a 25 gf load for 15 s. Hardness was calculated using the following formula: Vickers hardness number = 1.854 (F/D2). Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis was performed, with a diamond hemisphere and infrared beam being allowed to pass through each specimen. A mid-infrared range from 4000 to 375 cm−1 was recorded. The samples were also evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) combined with energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis spectroscopy at different magnifications. No statistically significant differences were observed between the included systems with regard to hardness. All systems showed a polyurethane-based material, as illustrated by the FTIR analysis. Some structural variations were noted in the Invisalign® system, which had a more homogeneous architecture. Statistically significant differences in the carbon weights were found among the systems. The four systems presented comparable hardness levels. Mild molecular composition differences were found, but all systems had the similarity of being composed of a polyurethane-based material. Carbon and oxygen were the main elements, as they were located in all studied clear aligners. The SEM analysis revealed that Invisalign® had a smoother surface than the other three systems. All included clear aligners had similar characteristics with minimal differences, providing a wide variety of options for clinical orthodontic treatment according to patients’ demands.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Dentistry Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Dentistry Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj10050073\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj10050073","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究的目的是评估三种透明对准器系统,Eon®,SureSmile®和Clarity®的结构构象,并将它们与最常用的系统Invisalign®进行比较。将Invisalign®、Eon®、SureSmile®和Clarity®的清洁矫正器样品切成5 × 5 mm的正方形,暴露在人工唾液中2周。然后通过施加三个单独的压痕,在25gf载荷下持续15 s,对样品进行维氏硬度测试。硬度计算公式如下:维氏硬度数= 1.854 (F/D2)。傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)分析进行,金刚石半球和红外光束被允许通过每个样品。记录了4000 ~ 375 cm−1的中红外范围。利用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)结合能量色散x射线微分析光谱在不同倍率下对样品进行了评价。在硬度方面,所纳入的体系之间没有统计学上的显著差异。正如FTIR分析所示,所有系统都显示为聚氨酯基材料。在Invisalign®系统中注意到一些结构变化,该系统具有更均匀的体系结构。系统间碳质量差异有统计学意义。这四种体系的硬度水平相当。发现了轻微的分子组成差异,但所有系统都具有由聚氨酯基材料组成的相似性。碳和氧是主要元素,因为它们位于所有研究的清晰对准器中。扫描电镜分析显示,Invisalign®比其他三种系统具有更光滑的表面。所有纳入的透明矫正器具有相似的特征,差异很小,根据患者的需求为临床正畸治疗提供了广泛的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Structural Conformation Comparison of Different Clear Aligner Systems: An In Vitro Study
The aim of this study was to evaluate the structural conformations of three clear aligner systems, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity®, and compare them with the most commonly used system, Invisalign®. Clear aligner samples from Invisalign®, Eon®, SureSmile®, and Clarity® were cut into 5 × 5 mm squares and exposed to artificial saliva for 2 weeks. The specimens were then subjected to a Vickers hardness test by applying three separate indentations with a 25 gf load for 15 s. Hardness was calculated using the following formula: Vickers hardness number = 1.854 (F/D2). Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis was performed, with a diamond hemisphere and infrared beam being allowed to pass through each specimen. A mid-infrared range from 4000 to 375 cm−1 was recorded. The samples were also evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) combined with energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis spectroscopy at different magnifications. No statistically significant differences were observed between the included systems with regard to hardness. All systems showed a polyurethane-based material, as illustrated by the FTIR analysis. Some structural variations were noted in the Invisalign® system, which had a more homogeneous architecture. Statistically significant differences in the carbon weights were found among the systems. The four systems presented comparable hardness levels. Mild molecular composition differences were found, but all systems had the similarity of being composed of a polyurethane-based material. Carbon and oxygen were the main elements, as they were located in all studied clear aligners. The SEM analysis revealed that Invisalign® had a smoother surface than the other three systems. All included clear aligners had similar characteristics with minimal differences, providing a wide variety of options for clinical orthodontic treatment according to patients’ demands.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Dentistry Journal
Open Dentistry Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
期刊最新文献
Calculus as a Risk Factor for Periodontal Disease: Narrative Review on Treatment Indications When the Response to Scaling and Root Planing Is Inadequate. Caries Experience and Treatment Needs in Urban and Rural Environments in School-Age Children from Three Provinces of Ecuador: A Cross-Sectional Study Cannabidiol in Dentistry: A Scoping Review Effectiveness of 38% Silver Diamine Fluoride in Reducing Dentine Hypersensitivity on Exposed Root Surface in Older Chinese Adults: Study Protocol for a Randomised Double-Blind Study Challenges and Opportunities for Dental Education from COVID-19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1