İki farklı sabit pekiştirme telinin alt kesici çapraşıklığına ve gingival dokulara etkilerinin incelenmesi
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2021
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Trakya Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu çalışmanın amacı, sabit pekiştirme amacı ile kullanılan 0,0215 inç 6 sarımlı paslanmaz çelik pekiştirme teli ve 0,027 x 0,011 inç dikdörtgen kesitli titanyum pekiştirme telini relapsı önleme başarıları ve gingival dokulara etkileri yönünden karşılaştırmaktır. Çalışmaya Trakya Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı’nda ortodontik tedavi görmüş, alt çene ön altı dişin lingual yüzeyine 0,027 x 0,011 inç dikdörtgen titanyum pekiştirme teli (Retainium, Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, ABD) uygulanmış 25 birey ve 0,0215 inç 6 sarımlı paslanmaz çelik pekiştirme teli (G&H Orthodontics, Franklin, ABD) uygulanmış 25 birey olmak üzere toplam 50 birey dahil edildi. Bireylerin alt arklarından pekiştirme teli yapıştırıldıktan hemen sonra, 3. ve 6. ayda ölçü alındı ve ölçülerden alçı model elde edildi. Alçı modeller tarayıcı ile taranarak dijital model elde edildi. Elde edilen dijital modeller üzerinde 3 boyutlu model ölçümü yapmaya izin veren yazılım (Orthomodel, İstanbul, Türkiye) aracılığı ile interkanin mesafe ve Little çapraşıklık indeksi ölçümleri yapıldı. Periodonsiyumun değerlendirilmesi için cep derinliği, plak indeksi, sondlamada kanama ölçümleri 0., 3. ve 6. ayda gerçekleştirildi. Aynı randevularda telde kopma, ayrılma, deformasyon gibi bir başarısızlık olup olmadığı değerlendirildi. Çalışmada, 0,027 x 0,011 inç dikdörtgen titanyum pekiştirme teli ve 0,0215 inç 6 sarımlı paslanmaz çelik pekiştirme teli arasında 6. ayın sonunda Little çapraşıklık indeksi ve interkanin mesafedeki değişim açısından fark görülmemiştir. İki materyal arasında 6. ayın da periodontal parametrelerdeki değişim açısından fark bulunamamıştır. İki materyalde de 6 aylık dönemde debonding, kopma, deformasyon gözlenmemiştir. İki materyalin de sabit pekiştirme apareyi olarak güvenle tercih edilebileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.
The aim of this study is to compare the 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire and 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire used for fixed retention in terms of their success in preventing relapse and their effects on gingival tissues. The study includes total 50 individuals who received orthodontic treatment at Trakya University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics and after that applied retainer wire. Half of the individuals had 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire (Retainium, Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA), while the other half had 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire (G&H Orthodontics, Franklin, USA). First impressions were taken immediately after retainer application, whereas remaining ones were taken at the 3rd and 6th months. Plaster models were obtained from impressions. The plaster models were transferred to digital via scanner. Intercanine distance and Little irregularity index measurements were performed by means of the software (Orthomodel, Istanbul, Turkey) that allows 3 dimensional measurement on the digital models. For the evaluation of the periodontium, pocket depth, plaque index and bleeding on probing measurements were performed at 0th, 3rd and 6th months. Moreover, it was evaluated whether there was any failure in the wire such as breakage, separation and deformation in the same appointments. The study reveals that there is no difference between the 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire and 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire in terms of Little irregularity index and intercanine distance at the end of the 6th month. Also, it has been shown that there is no difference between the two materials in terms of the change in periodontal parameters at the end of the 6th month. Debonding, breakage or deformation was not observed in both materials at the 6-month period. It has been concluded that both materials can be safely used for fixed retention.
The aim of this study is to compare the 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire and 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire used for fixed retention in terms of their success in preventing relapse and their effects on gingival tissues. The study includes total 50 individuals who received orthodontic treatment at Trakya University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics and after that applied retainer wire. Half of the individuals had 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire (Retainium, Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA), while the other half had 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire (G&H Orthodontics, Franklin, USA). First impressions were taken immediately after retainer application, whereas remaining ones were taken at the 3rd and 6th months. Plaster models were obtained from impressions. The plaster models were transferred to digital via scanner. Intercanine distance and Little irregularity index measurements were performed by means of the software (Orthomodel, Istanbul, Turkey) that allows 3 dimensional measurement on the digital models. For the evaluation of the periodontium, pocket depth, plaque index and bleeding on probing measurements were performed at 0th, 3rd and 6th months. Moreover, it was evaluated whether there was any failure in the wire such as breakage, separation and deformation in the same appointments. The study reveals that there is no difference between the 0,027 x 0,011 inch rectangular titanium retainer wire and 0,0215 inch 6 stranded stainless steel retainer wire in terms of Little irregularity index and intercanine distance at the end of the 6th month. Also, it has been shown that there is no difference between the two materials in terms of the change in periodontal parameters at the end of the 6th month. Debonding, breakage or deformation was not observed in both materials at the 6-month period. It has been concluded that both materials can be safely used for fixed retention.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Little çapraşıklık indeksi, Ortodontide retansiyon, Pekiştirme teli, Periodontal sağlık, Relaps, Little irregularity index, Periodontal health, Retention in orthodontics, Retainer wire, Relapse
