口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (7): 596-601.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2026.07.008

• 口腔正畸学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

一步法与两步法光固化型牙釉质粘合树脂对正畸托槽粘接强度的对比研究

崔孟雅1, 宋文璐2, 钟庭进2, 陈远强2, 韩玉2, 陈子炀2, 吴江裕2, 吉利1*   

  1. 1.中山大学附属第一医院口腔科 广东 广州 510062;
    2.广东省口腔正畸工程技术研究中心 广东 广州 510080
  • 收稿日期:2025-11-14 发布日期:2026-07-22
  • 通讯作者: *吉利,E-mail:orthodentist_jili@163.com
  • 作者简介:崔孟雅(1994~ ),女,河南商丘人,学士,医师,研究方向:口腔科临床治疗工作。
  • 基金资助:
    教育部产学合作协同育人项目(编号:240701316220512、220901316063638、220801316245152) 广州市创新创业领军人才项目(2021-L004)

Comparative Study on Bonding Strength of One-step and Two-step Light-cured Adhesive Resins for Orthodontic Bracket Fixation

CUI Mengya1, SONG Wenlu2, ZHONG Tingjin2, CHEN Yuanqiang2, HAN Yu2, CHEN Ziyang2, WU Jiangyu2, JI Li1*   

  1. 1. Department of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510062, China;
    2. Guangdong Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Orthodontics, Guangzhou 510080, China
  • Received:2025-11-14 Published:2026-07-22

PDF (PC)

13

摘要： 目的: 对比新型一步法光固化型牙釉质粘合树脂与两种临床常用两步法牙釉质粘合树脂的粘接强度,并评估其在金属与陶瓷托槽粘接中的性能差异。方法: 制作上颌第一前磨牙牙冠模型,并采用3D打印技术制备标准化粘接模具(控制树脂厚度0.3 mm),使用单因素方差分析比较3种树脂(A组:3M,B组:XIHUBIOM,C组:OO,n=20)的剪切粘接强度(shear bond strength, SBS);120颗离体前磨牙按托槽类型(金属/陶瓷)分组,每组按树脂类型分为3个亚组(n=20),检测冷热循环(0次/1000次)后的SBS,并采用多因素方差分析结合Tukey检验进行统计分析。结果: 树脂内聚强度:A组SBS[(22.65±1.95) MPa]显著高于C组[(20.83±1.51) MPa],C组SBS显著高于B组[(18.31±2.07) MPa,P<0.05]。对于金属托槽,A组SBS[(21.39±1.90) MPa]显著高于B组[(17.12±2.16) MPa]和C组[(18.37±2.06) MPa,P<0.05],B/C两组比较无显著差异。对于同种牙釉质粘合树脂,仅A组中金属托槽的SBS显著高于陶瓷托槽(P<0.05);在B组与C组中,金属托槽的SBS虽略高于陶瓷托槽,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。经冷热循环后,3组中两种托槽的SBS均出现轻微下降,但与循环前相比,各组内的差异均不显著(P>0.05),且其强度仍能满足临床粘接要求。结论: 新型一步法粘合树脂对金属托槽和陶瓷托槽的SBS介于两种传统树脂之间,其值显著高于6~8 MPa的临床建议阈值,并表现出良好的抗冷热循环老化性能,能简化临床操作并满足两种托槽的临床粘接需求。

关键词: 一步法, 两步法, 粘合树脂, 剪切粘接强度, 金属托槽, 陶瓷托槽

Abstract: Objective: To compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of a novel one-step light-cured adhesive resin with two conventional two-step adhesive resins and evaluate their performance differences in bonding metal and ceramic orthodontic brackets. Methods: Standardized bonding molds (resin layer thickness 0.3 mm) were fabricated using maxillary first premolar crown models and 3D printing technology. ANOVA was used to compare the SBS of three resins (A: 3M, B: XIHUBIOM, C: OO, n=20). 120 extracted first premolars were divided into two main groups (metal/ceramic brackets), with each main group further subdivided into three subgroups (n=20) based on resin type. SBS was measured after 0 and 1000 thermal cycles, and multifactorial ANOVA combined with Tukey test was used for statistical analysis. Results: Resin cohesive strongth: Group A [(22.65±1.95) MPa] was significantly higher than Group C [(20.83±1.51) MPa], which in turn was significantly higher than Group B [(18.31±2.07) MPa, P<0.05]. In bracket bonding tests, for metal brackets, SBS of Group A [(21.39±1.90) MPa] significantly exceeded that of Groups B [(17.12±2.16) MPa] and C [(18.37±2.06) MPa, P<0.05], while no significant difference was observed between B and C. When comparing bracket types within the same resin, only Group A showed significantly higher SBS with metal than with ceramic brackets (P<0.05). Groups B and C showed no bracket-type-related differences. After thermal cycling, all groups exhibited a slight, non-significant decrease in SBS (P>0.05), with values remaining above the clinical acceptability threshold. Conclusion: The SBS values of novel one-step adhesive resin for both metal and ceramic brackets were intermediate between those of two conventional resin systems, which exceeded the clinically recommended threshold of 6-8 MPa and exhibited excellent resistance to thermocycling-induced aging. This adhesive system simplifies clinical procedures and effectively meets the bonding requirements for both types of orthodontic brackets.

Key words: one-step adhesive, two-step adhesive, adhesive resin, shear bond strength, metal brackets, ceramic brackets