21 research outputs found
Physico-Mechanical Properties and Bonding Performance of Graphene-Added Orthodontic Adhesives
This study aimed to assess the key physico-mechanical properties and bonding performance of orthodontic adhesives with graphene addition for bonding a fixed retainer. Transbond LR (3M) and Transbond LV (3M) with no graphene were set as the control groups. Graphene was added into LR and LV at concentrations of 0.01 wt%, 0.05 wt% and 0.1 wt%. The stickiness of the uncured samples (n = 5) and real-time degree of conversion (DC) of the samples (n = 3) were measured over a 24-h period using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy. The hardness and other mechanical parameters, including the Martens hardness (HM), indentation modulus (E IT), elastic index (η IT) and creep (C IT), were measured (n = 5). To measure the shear bond strength (SBS), adhesive composites were applied using a mold to bond the retainer wire to the lingual surfaces of bovine incisors (n = 10). Fracture modes subsequent to the SBS test were examined under light microscopy. Statistical analysis was conducted using ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05). In the LR groups, the LR + 0.01 showed the highest SBS (12.6 ± 2.0 MPa) and HM (539.4 ± 17.9 N/mm 2), while the LV + 0.05 (7.7 ± 1.1 MPa) had the highest SBS and the LV + 0.1 had the highest HM (312.4 ± 17.8 N/mm 2) among the LV groups. The most frequent failure mode observed was adhesive fracture followed by mixed fracture. No statistical difference was found between the graphene-added groups and the control groups in terms of the E IT, η IT and C IT, except that the C IT was significantly lower in the LR + 0.01 than in the control group. Graphene addition had no significant adverse effect on the stickiness and DC of both LR and LV.</p
Film and digital periapical radiographs for the measurement of apical root shortening
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and agreement of scanned film and digital periapical
radiographs for the measurement of apical root shortening.
Study design: Twenty-four film and digital [phosphor plate sensor (PPS)] periapical radiographs were taken using
the long-cone paralleling technique for six extracted teeth before and after 1mm of apical root trimming. All teeth
were mounted using a typodont and the radiographs were recorded using a film holder and polysiloxane occlusal index
for each tooth to ensure standardization during the different radiographic exposures. The film radiographs were
scanned and the tooth length measurements for the scanned film and digital (PPS) images were calculated using
Image-J-Link 1.4 software (http://rebweb.nih.gov/ij/index.html) for the two groups. The accuracy and agreement
among the tooth length measurements from each group and the true tooth length measurements were calculated
using intra-class correlation (ICC) tests and Bland and Altman plots.
Results: A high level of agreement was found between the true tooth length measurements and the scanned film
measurements (ICC=0.979, limit of agreement 0.579 to -0.565) and the digital (PPS) radiograph measurements
(ICC= 0.979, limit of agreement 0.596 to -0.763). Moreover, a high level of agreement was found between the
scanned film and digital (PPS) radiographs for the measurement of tooth length ICC=0.991, limit of agreement
0.411-0.231.
Conclusion: Film and digital (PPS) periapical radiographs are accurate methods for measuring apical root shortening
with a high level of agreement
Development of intra-oral automated landmark recognition (ALR) for dental and occlusal outcome measurements
BACKGROUND: Previous studies embracing digital technology and automated methods of scoring dental arch relationships have shown that such technology is valid and accurate. To date, however there is no published literature on artificial intelligence and machine learning to completely automate the process of dental landmark recognition. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop and evaluate a fully automated system and software tool for the identification of landmarks on human teeth using geometric computing, image segmenting, and machine learning technology. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-nine digital models were used in the automated landmark recognition (ALR) validation phase, 161 of which were digital models from cleft palate subjects aged 5 years. These were manually annotated to facilitate qualitative validation. Additionally, landmarks were placed on 20 adult digital models manually by 3 independent observers. The same models were subjected to scoring using the ALR software and the differences (in mm) were calculated. All the teeth from the 239 models were evaluated for correct recognition by the ALR with a breakdown to find which stages of the process caused the errors. RESULTS: The results revealed that 1526 out of 1915 teeth (79.7%) were correctly identified, and the accuracy validation gave 95% confidence intervals for the geometric mean error of [0.285, 0.317] for the humans and [0.269, 0.325] for ALR—a negligible difference. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: It is anticipated that ALR software tool will have applications throughout clinical dentistry and anthropology, and in research will constitute an accurate and objective tool for handling large datasets without the need for time intensive employment of experts to place landmarks manually
Comparing the effectiveness of the 0.018-inch versus the 0.022-inch bracket slot system in orthodontic treatment:study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Edgewise fixed orthodontic appliances are available in two different bracket slot sizes (0.018 and 0.022 inch). Both systems are used by clinicians worldwide with some orthodontists claiming the superiority and clinical advantages of one system over the other. However, the scientific evidence supporting this area is scarce and weak. This leaves the clinician’s choice of bracket slot system to clinical preference. We aim to compare the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch pre-adjusted bracket slot systems in terms of the effectiveness of orthodontic treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, undertaken in the secondary care hospital environment in the NHS Tayside region of Scotland (United Kingdom). A total of 216 orthodontic patients will be recruited in three centers in secondary care hospitals in NHS Tayside. The participants will be randomly allocated to treatment with either the 0.018-inch or 0.022-inch bracket slot systems (n = 108 for each group) using Victory series™ conventional pre-adjusted bracket systems (3 M Unitek, Monrovia, United States). Baseline records and outcome data collected during and at the end of orthodontic treatment will be assessed. The primary outcome measures will be the duration of orthodontic treatment in the maxillary and mandibular arches. The secondary outcome measures will be the number of scheduled appointments for orthodontic treatment in the maxillary and mandibular arches, treatment outcome using Peer Assessment Rating index (PAR), orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (as measured using periapical radiographs) and the patient’s perception of wearing orthodontic appliances. DISCUSSION: The results from the current study will serve as evidence to guide the clinician in deciding whether the difference in bracket slot size has a significant impact on the effectiveness of orthodontic treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 March 2014, registration number: NCT02080338