Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的比较研究  

Comparative study of Duraphat and Fluor Protector on inhibiting enamel demineralization during fixed orthodontic treatment

作　　者：杨茜[1] 付梦辰 王慧慧[1] 乔璐 赵玉梅[1] YANG Xi;FU Mengchen;WANG Huihui;QIAO Lu;ZHAO Yumei(Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Tooth Restoration and Regeneration,Department of Pediatric Dentistry,School of Stomatology,Tongji University,Shanghai 200072,China)

机构地区：[1]上海牙组织修复与再生工程技术研究中心同济大学口腔医学院儿童口腔医学教研室

出　　处：《口腔医学》2019年第11期1022-1026,共5页Stomatology

摘　　要：目的使用激光龋齿探测仪,比较两种含氟物Duraphat与Fluor Protector抑制固定正畸矫治中牙釉质脱矿的临床效果。方法选取接受直丝弓固定矫治的12~18岁青少年患者60例,采用自身对照法,试验组A右上前牙及前磨牙涂布Fluor Protector,试验组B左下前牙及前磨牙涂布Duraphat,对照组A左上前牙及前磨牙不使用任何药物,对照组B右下前牙及前磨牙仅涂布0.9%的氯化钠水溶液。分别于患者粘接正畸托槽前、粘接托槽后1个月、3个月使用激光龋齿检测仪测试受试牙牙面并记录荧光值(DD),应用单因素方差分析比较各组数值是否有统计学差异。结果①正畸托槽粘接后1个月、3个月时,2组涂布氟漆试验组的DD值均低于2组未涂布氟漆的对照组(P<0.05),说明Duraphat与Fluor Protector两种氟漆均显示了明显抑制釉质脱矿的能力。②正畸托槽粘接后1个月、3个月时,涂布Flour Protector的试验组A与涂布Duraphat的试验组B的DD值间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),说明两种不同浓度的氟保护漆在抑制牙釉质脱矿的能力方面没有明显优劣。结论①接受固定矫治的患者存在釉质脱矿的易感性。②Duraphat与Fluor Protector两种不同浓度的氟化物对正畸过程中牙釉质的脱矿均有抑制作用,二者抑制脱矿的能力没有明显差异。③DIAGNOdent激光龋齿检测仪适合临床探查釉质的脱矿及龋损,对釉质表面的改变感应相当敏锐,帮助医师对龋病做出早期诊断,及早监控并采取合适的措施。Objective Using the laser cavity detection system DIAGNOdent to compare the effects of Duraphat and Fluor Protector on inhibition of enamel demineralization after fixed orthodontic appliance during three-months.Methods In our department,60 teenagers with straight-wire appliance were enrolled in the study.This experiment adopted the self-control method.The right upper anterior teeth and premolars were given Duraphat as experimental group A,and the left lower anterior teeth and premolars were given Fluor Protector as experimental group B.The left upper anterior teeth and premolars did not receive any special treatment as control group A,and the right lower anterior teeth and premolars were given normal saline as control group B.Before bonding brackets,1 and 3 months after bonding brackets,the degree of enamel demineralization was detected by the laser cavity detection system(DD value).One-way ANOVA analysis was used to compare enamel demineralization to find out whether there was statistical significance.Results①The DD detection values of the two experimental groups were both significantly lower than that of the control groups 1 and 3 months after bonding brackets,indicating that Duraphat and Fluor Protector could inhibit the enamel demineralization(P<0.05).②The DD detection values between experimental A and experimental B groups 1 and 3 months after bonding brackets showed no significantly difference(P>0.05),indicating that there was no significantly difference between the two kinds of fluoride varnish in inhibiting demineralization.Conclusion①The patients with fixed orthodontic treatment are susceptible to enamel demineralization.②Duraphat and Fluor Protector with two different concentrations can both inhibit enamel demineralization during orthodontics.There is no significant difference between the two in inhibiting demineralization.③DIAGNOdent laser detector shows fairly sensitivity for morphological change on enamel surface.It is appropriate for clinical detection of dental caries and monitoring of en

关 键 词：多乐氟 氟保护漆 牙釉质脱矿 

分 类 号：R780.1[医药卫生—口腔医学]