Plasma arc versus halogen light curing of orthodontic brackets: a 12-month clinical study of bond failures

2004 ◽  
Vol 125 (3) ◽  
pp. 342-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Francesca Sfondrini ◽  
Vittorio Cacciafesta ◽  
Andrea Scribante ◽  
Catherine Klersy
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Plasma Arc ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Light Curing

scholarly journals Prototype of a new tip developed to be coupled to dental light-curing units for optimizing bonding of orthodontic brackets and accessories

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
Sergio Luiz Mota Júnior ◽  
Márcio José da Silva Campos ◽  
Marco Abdo Gravina ◽  
Marcelo Reis Fraga ◽  
Robert Willer Farinazzo Vitral
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Light Exposure ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Light Refraction ◽  
New Device ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Light Curing

OBJECTIVE: development of a new device to be coupled to light-curing units for bonding orthodontic brackets and accessories, and test its efficacy in an in vitro mechanical trial. The inner surface of the device is mirrored and is based on physical concepts of light refraction and reflection. The main advantage of such device is the reduced clinical time needed for bonding and the low possibility of contamination during the process. METHODS: One hundred and twenty specimens were used for testing the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with the device. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was also determined. The sample was divided into 2 groups. In group 1 a halogen light-curing unit was used while in group 2 a led light-curing unit was used. Each group was then subdivided. In subgroups H1 and L1, a conventional light guide rod was used while in subgroups H2 and L2 bonding was performed with the mirrored device coupled to the tip of the guide light rod. RESULTS: The values obtained for the shear bond strength and the ARI in the subgroups were compared. Results showed that there was no statistically significant difference for the shear strength (p > 0.05) and the ARI (p > 0.05) between the subgroups. CONCLUSION: The tests of mechanical trials and the ARI analysis showed that the new device fulfilled the requirements for bonding orthodontic accessories, and that the time for bonding was reduced to half, being necessary only one light exposure.

scholarly journals The Effect of Irradiation Distance on Microhardness of Resin Composites Cured with Different Light Curing Units

2010 ◽  
Vol 04 (04) ◽  
pp. 440-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isil Cekic-Nagas ◽  
Ferhan Egilmez ◽  
Gulfem Ergun
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Layer ◽  
Hardness Test ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Plasma Arc ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Quartz Tungsten Halogen ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Light Curing

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the microhardness of five different resin composites at different irradiation distances (2 mm and 9 mm) by using three light curing units (quartz tungsten halogen, light emitting diodes and plasma arc).Methods: A total of 210 disc-shaped samples (2 mm height and 6 mm diameter) were prepared from different resin composites (Simile, Aelite Aesthetic Enamel, Clearfil AP-X, Grandio caps and Filtek Z250). Photoactivation was performed by using quartz tungsten halogen, light emitting diode and plasma arc curing units at two irradiation distances (2 mm and 9 mm). Then the samples (n=7/ per group) were stored dry in dark at 37°C for 24 h. The Vickers hardness test was performed on the resin composite layer with a microhardness tester (Shimadzu HMV). Data were statistically analyzed using nonparametric Kruskal Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests.Results: Statistical analysis revealed that the resin composite groups, the type of the light curing units and the irradiation distances have significant effects on the microhardness values (P<.05).Conclusions: Light curing unit and irradiation distance are important factors to be considered for obtaining adequate microhardness of different resin composite groups. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:440-446)

scholarly journals Evaluation of different LED light-curing devices for bonding metallic orthodontic brackets

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Maia de Souza Pinto ◽  
José Tarcísio Lima Ferreira ◽  
Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto ◽  
Maria Cristina Borsatto ◽  
Raquel Assed Bezerra da Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Led Light ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Light Curing

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of different light-emitting diodes (LED) light-curing devices for bonding orthodontic brackets, using the shear bond strength and analysis of adhesive remnant index (ARI). Crowns from 60 bovine incisors received brackets bonded with Transbond XT. Specimens were divided into 4 groups (n=15) according to the light-curing procedures: HL = control, halogen light; OR = Ortholux LED; UL = Ultraled XP, and RD = Radii LED. All light-curing procedures were performed for 40 s. Shear bond strength test was evaluated using an universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's test. The ARI scores were evaluated with a stereoscopic magnifying glass and analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test. A significance level of 5% was set for all analyses. Shear bond strength means in MPa and standard deviations were 9.82 (3.28), 12.70 (3.35), 9.04 (2.80) and 11.22 (2.36) for HL, OR, UL and RD, respectively. OR presented the highest shear bond strength mean value. HL differed significantly (p<0.05) from Groups OR and RD. However, these groups did not differ significantly from each other (p>0.05). Regarding the ARI scores, no statistically significant difference was observed (p>0.05) among the groups. In conclusion, Ortholux LED and Radii LED units provided the highest values of bracket adhesive strength.

scholarly journals Effects of Fluorosis and Self Etching Primers on Shear Bond Strengths of Orthodontic Brackets

2009 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 173-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmet Yalcin Gungor ◽  
Hakan Turkkahraman ◽  
Necdet Adanir ◽  
Huseyin Alkis
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Universal Testing ◽  
Adhesive Remnant Index ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bond Strengths ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Clinical Changes

ABSTRACTObjectives: To evaluate the effects fluorosis and self etching primers (SEP) on shear bond strengths (SBS) of orthodontic brackets.Methods: A total of 48 (24 fluorosed and 24 non-fluorosed) non-carious freshly extracted human permanent premolar teeth were used in this study. Fluorosed teeth were selected according to the modified Thylstrup and Fejerskov index (TFI), which is based on the clinical changes in fluorosed teeth. Fluorosed and non-fluorosed teeth were randomly assigned to 4 groups of 12 each. In groups I (non-fluorosed teeth) and II (fluorosed teeth), standard etching protocol was used and brackets were bonded with Light Bond. In groups III (non-fluorosed teeth) and IV (fluorosed teeth), Transbond Plus SEP was used and brackets were bonded with Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive. All specimens were cured with a halogen light. After bonding, SBS of the brackets were tested with Universal testing machine. After debonding, all teeth and brackets in the test groups were examined under 10x magnifications. Any adhesive remained after debonding was assessed and scored according to the modified Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI).Results: ANOVA indicated a significant difference between groups (P<.001). SBS in group II (Light Bond+Fluorosis) were significantly lower than other groups. ARI scores of the groups were also significantly different (P<.001). There was a greater frequency of ARI scores of 1,2 and 3 in group II (Light Bond+Fluorosis).Conclusions: When standard etching protocol was used enamel fluorosis significantly decreased the bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Satisfactory bond strengths were obtained when SEP was used for bonding brackets to the fluorosed teeth. (Eur J Dent 2009;3:173-177)

scholarly journals Microleakage under Orthodontic Brackets Using High-Intensity Curing Lights

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ulker ◽  
Tancan Uysal ◽  
Sabri Ilhan Ramoglu ◽  
Huseyin Ertas
Keyword(s):  
High Intensity ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Bonferroni Correction ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Halogen Light Source ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Curing Light ◽  
High Intensity Light ◽  
Nail Varnish

Abstract Objective: To compare the microleakage of the enamel-adhesive-bracket complex at the occlusal and gingival margins of brackets bonded with high-intensity light curing lights and conventional halogen lights. Materials and Methods: Forty-five freshly extracted human maxillary premolar teeth were randomly separated into three groups of 15 teeth each. Stainless steel brackets were bonded in all groups according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Specimens (15 per group) were cured for 40 seconds with a conventional halogen light, 20 seconds with light-emitting diode (LED), and 6 seconds with plasma arc curing light (PAC). After curing, the specimens were further sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic-fuchsine for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for microleakage for the enamel-adhesive and bracket-adhesive interfaces from both the occlusal and gingival margins. Statistical analyses were performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests with a Bonferroni correction. Results: The type of light curing unit did not significantly affect the amount of microleakage at the gingival or occlusal margins of investigated interfaces (P &gt;.05). The gingival sides in the LED and PAC groups exhibited higher microleakage scores compared with those observed on occlusal sides for the enamel-adhesive and adhesive-bracket interfaces. The halogen light source showed similar microleakage at the gingival and occlusal sides between both adhesive interfaces. Conclusions: High-intensity curing units did not cause more microleakage than conventional halogen lights. This supports the use of all these curing units in routine orthodontic practice.

scholarly journals Effect of Light-Sources and Thicknesses of Composite Onlays on Micro-Hardness of Luting Composites

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (22) ◽  
pp. 6849
Author(s):  
Francesco De Angelis ◽  
Mirco Vadini ◽  
Mario Capogreco ◽  
Camillo D’Arcangelo ◽  
Maurizio D’Amario
Keyword(s):  
High Power ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Layer ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Specimen Thickness ◽  
Light Sources ◽  
Curing Time ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Light Curing

The aim of this study was to compare three different light-curing-units (LCUs) and determine their effectiveness in the adhesive cementation of indirect composite restorations when a light-curing resin cement is used. Two resin composites were selected: Enamel Plus HRI (Micerium) and AURA (SDI). Three thicknesses (3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm) were produced and applied as overlays and underlays for each resin composite. A standardized composite layer was placed between underlay and overlay surfaces. Light curing of the resin-based luting composites was attained through the overlay filters using LCUs for different exposure times. All specimens were allocated to experimental groups according to the overlay thickness, curing unit and curing time. Vickers Hardness (VH) notches were carried out on each specimen. Data were statistically evaluated. The curing unit, curing time and overlay thickness were significant factors capable of influencing VH values. The results showed significantly decreased VH values with increasing specimen thickness (p < 0.05). Significant differences in VH values were found amongst the LCUs for the various exposure times (p < 0.05). According to the results, a time of cure shorter than 80 s (with a conventional quartz–tungsten–halogen LCU) or shorter than 40 s (with a high-power light-emitting diode (LED) LCU) is not recommended. The only subgroup achieving clinically acceptable VH values after a short 20 s curing time included the 3 mm-thick overlays made out of the AURA composite, when the high-power LED LCU unit was used (VH 51.0). Composite thickness has an intense effect on polymerization. In clinical practice, light-cured resin cements may result in insufficient polymerization for high thickness and inadequate times. High-intensity curing lights can attain the sufficient polymerization of resin cements through overlays in a significantly shorter time than conventional halogen light.

scholarly journals Influence of curing mode of resin luting cements on bond strength to dentin

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 258
Author(s):  
Marcelo Giannini ◽  
Andreia Assis Carvalho ◽  
Ariovaldo Stefani ◽  
Wladimir Franco de Sá Barbosa ◽  
Lawrence Gonzaga Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Luting Cements ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Tooth Surfaces ◽  
Light Curing

Self-adhesive, dual-polymerizing resin cements require no treatment to the prepared tooth surfaces before cementation. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of curing mode on bond strength (BS) of three cementing systems to bovine dentin. Methods: The buccal enamel surfaces of 50 bovine incisors were removed to expose dentin and to flat the surface. The teeth were divided into five groups (n=10), which consisted of two resin cements (Multilink and Clearfil SA Cement) that were tested in dual- (halogen light for 40 s) and self-cured modes, and a control (RelyX ARC). Two cylinders of resin cements (1.0 mm X 0.75 mm) were prepared on each bonded dentin surface. After 24h at 37oC, resin cylinders were subjected to micro-shear testing in a universal testing machine (4411/Instron - 0.5 mm/min). Data were statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA, Tukey and Dunnett`s test (5%). Results: Multilink showed higher BS than those observed on Clearfil SA. Light-curing resulted in higher BS for both Multilink and Clearfil SA. When Multilink was light-cured, no significant difference on BS was demonstrated between it and RelyX ARC. Conclusions: The highest BS values were obtained in control group and light-cured Multilink resin cement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document