scholarly journals Shear Bond Strength of Three Orthodontic Bonding Systems on Enamel and Restorative Materials

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Hellak ◽  
Jennifer Ebeling ◽  
Michael Schauseil ◽  
Steffen Stein ◽  
Matthias Roggendorf ◽  
...  

Objective.The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) score of two self-etching no-mix adhesives (iBond™and Scotchbond™) on different prosthetic surfaces and enamel, in comparison with the commonly used total etch system Transbond XT™.Materials and Methods. A total of 270 surfaces (1 enamel and 8 restorative surfaces,n=30) were randomly divided into three adhesive groups. In group 1 (control) brackets were bonded with Transbond XT primer. In the experimental groups iBond adhesive (group 2) and Scotchbond Universal adhesive (group 3) were used. The SBS was measured using a Zwicki 1120™testing machine. The ARI and SBS were compared statistically using the Kruskal–Wallis test (P≤0.05).Results. Significant differences in SBS and ARI were found between the control group and experimental groups.Conclusions. Transbond XT showed the highest SBS on human enamel. Scotchbond Universal on average provides the best bonding on all other types of surface (metal, composite, and porcelain), with no need for additional primers. It might therefore be helpful for simplifying bonding in orthodontic procedures on restorative materials in patients. If metal brackets have to be bonded to a metal surface, the use of a dual-curing resin is recommended.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Zohreh Moradi ◽  
Farnoosh Akbari ◽  
Sara Valizadeh

Aim. This study aimed to assess shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to zirconia ceramic with different surface treatments by using Single Bond Universal. Methods. In this in vitro study, 50 zirconia discs (2 × 6 mm) were divided into 5 groups of (I) sandblasting with silica-coated alumina (CoJet)  + silane + Single Bond 2, (II) sandblasting with CoJet + Single Bond Universal, (III) sandblasting with alumina + Single Bond Universal, (IV) sandblasting with alumina + Z-Prime Plus, and (V) Single Bond Universal with no surface treatment. Resin cement was applied in plastic tubes (3 × 5 mm2), and after 10,000 thermal cycles, the SBS was measured by a universal testing machine. The mode of failure was determined under a stereomicroscope at × 40 magnification. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Results. The maximum (6.56 ± 4.29 MPa) and minimum (1.94 ± 1.96 MPa) SBS values were noted in groups III and I, respectively. Group III had the highest frequency of mixed failure (60%). Group V had the maximum frequency of adhesive failure (100%). Conclusion. Single Bond Universal + sandblasting with alumina or silica-coated alumina particles is an acceptable method to provide a strong SBS between resin cement and zirconia.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ladan Ranjbar Omrani ◽  
Saba Tohidkhah ◽  
Elham Ahmadi ◽  
Mahdi Abbasi ◽  
Reza Morvaridi Farimani

Abstract Background: The aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the influence of Dycal, Lime-lite, Theracal LC, Biodentine, Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and Activa Bioactive as the pulp capping material on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin.Methods: A total of 70 extracted caries-free molars were randomly assigned to seven groups. Six test groups were covered with various protective liners: Dycal (GD), Theracal LC (GT), lime-lite (GL), Activa Bioactive (GA), Biodentine (GB), RMGIC (GR). The control group (GC)received no liner pretreatment. Each sample was bonded to resin composite using the total-etch tetric N bond adhesive. The samples were then tested for shear bond strength using the universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until bond failure occurred. The data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA test followed by the Tamhane post-hoc test for pairwise comparisons of the groupsResults: Independent of the type of the applied liner, all groups exhibited inferior SBS to dentine compared to the control group. GT and GR showed significantly higher shear bond strength than GB and GD, which showed the lowest shear bond strength. GL and GA also had significantly lower SBS results than GT. The mode of fracture was predominantly cohesive in GD, GB, and GT and adhesive in GA.Conclusion: This present study concludes that the bond strength of resin-composite to dentine can be affected differently using various types of liners.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1025-1026 ◽  
pp. 385-390
Author(s):  
Niwat Anuwongnukroh ◽  
Surachai Dechkunakorn ◽  
Jirawat Arunakol ◽  
Wassana Wichai

One of the problems that often occurred during orthodontic treatment is bracket failure. This is usually the result either of the patient’s accidentally, applying inappropriate forces to the bracket or of a poor bonding technique. Thus, a significant number of teeth have to be rebonded in an orthodontic practice. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro initial repeated shear bond strength of the three adhesive systems at two and five minutes after placement of a bracket. Materials and Methods: The three bonding agent adhesives are System1+, Rely-a-bond, Unite. Two hundred and forty human premolar teeth were divided into two groups, a control and an experimental group. Each group was further divided into three subgroups for bonding brackets with the three different adhesives. Only the teeth in the experimental group were sequentially bonded and debonded two times with the same adhesive. The teeth in control and experimental groups were tested for shear bond strength (at two and five minutes after the bracket was bonded) with an Instron testing machine. Results: The studies were found that : (1) there were differences between the shear bond strength of each adhesive in the control and experimental group. Unite had the highest shear bond strength followed by Rely-a-bond and System1+ at two minutes and five minutes, (2) the experiment group ( rebonded brackets) had higher shear bond strength than control group and Unite had in significant difference (p<0.05) of initial repeated bond strength with System1+ and Rely-a-bond at two minutes and five minutes and (3) there were mostly significant difference (p<0.05) between repeated shear bond strength at two minutes and repeated shear bond strength at five minutes. Conclusion: There were significant difference of the initial repeated shear bond strength of each adhesive. The orthodontists should be aware of applying force for tooth movement into the repeated bonding brackets.


Author(s):  
Zahra Khamverdi ◽  
Naemeh Karimian ◽  
Maryam Farhadian ◽  
Hamed Gheitouli

Objectives: Bond strength of composite restorations plays an important role in their success. This in vitro study evaluated the effect of a hemostatic agent on shear bond strength of universal adhesives. Materials and Methods: Thirty-six extracted human molars were used in this study. Buccal and lingual surfaces were reduced to obtain flat dentin surfaces and were ground with a silicone paper. The samples were randomly divided into three groups (n=12) based on the application of hemostatic agent: group 1: no contamination (control), group 2: aluminum chloride application, and group 3: ferric sulfate application. Each group was then divided into two subgroups (n=6) for using G-Premio and Single Bond Universal. Resin cylinders (Filtek Z550) were bonded to dentin surfaces according to the manufacturer’s instructions. After 1000 thermal cycles, shear load was applied to the specimens using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until failure. Data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test (α=0.05). Results: There were statistically significant differences in shear bond strength of the three main groups for both G-Premio and Single Bond Universal (P<0.05). When the adhesive systems were compared with each other, G-Premio showed higher shear bond strength than Single Bond Universal (P<0.05). Conclusion: Contamination with hemostatic agents had an adverse effect on the shear bond strength of universal adhesives. Moreover, G-Premio yielded a higher bond strength than Single Bond Universal.


2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-49
Author(s):  
BM Shivalinga ◽  
H Jyothikiran ◽  
Amit Goyal

ABSTRACT Aims To determine the effect of self-etchant pH on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets; to compare the shear bond strengths of brackets bonded with three SEPs and brackets bonded with conventional etch, rinse, bond method and to find the brackets/adhesive failure mode. Materials and methods One hundred and twenty premolar teeth were cleaned, mounted, and randomly divided into four groups of 30 samples each- Transbond XT conventional etch and bond system (control), Adper SE Plus SEP (3M ESPE) with a pH of 0.9 to 1.0, Transbond Plus SEP (3M Unitek) with a pH of about 1.0 and Clearfil SE Bond SEP (Kuraray America) with a pH of around 2.0. All teeth were bonded with Transbond XT paste (3M Unitek). The teeth were debonded within half an hour after initial bonding by using a universal testing machine. The residual adhesive on each tooth was evaluated. ANOVA was used to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of the three groups, and the Chi-square test was used to compare the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores for the three groups. Results ANOVA indicated significant differences between the groups. Clearfil attained the SBS (6.5 ± 0.6689 MPa) closest to the control group, whereas Adper inspite of being the most aggressive recorded the lowest SBS (5.7 ± 0.5695 MPa). Transbond self-etching primer achieved a mean SBS of 6.1 ± 0.6211 MPa. However, all the three SEPs recorded SBS which was significantly less than that of Transbond conventional etch, rinse and bond system (11.8027 ± 0.8059 MPa). The comparisons of the ARI scores between the three groups indicated that bracket failure mode was significantly different between the three groups (p < 0.05). Conclusion These findings show that factors other than pH, such as the ability of the bonding adhesive to form a chemical bond to enamel and the strength of the bonding adhesive itself, significantly influence the SBS of orthodontic brackets. How to cite this article Goyal A, Jyothikiran H, Shivalinga BM. Effect of Self-etchant pH on Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets: An in vitro Study. World J Dent 2012;3(1):41-49.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-31
Author(s):  
Varunjeet Chaudhary ◽  
Sanad Singh Solanki ◽  
Varsha Yadav ◽  
Seema Lahoti

Objective: To evaluate the shear bond strength of stainless steel brackets bonded with fluoride-releasing composite resins, comparing effect of adhesion booster and conventional primer.Materials & Method: Sixty extracted premolars were subjected to bracket bonding with fluoride-releasing composite resin; which were bonded by randomly divided into two groups of bonding agents: Group 1- conventional primer as control group, Group 2- adhesion booster. After bonding, the samples were thermocycled (500 cycles) at 5ºC and 55ºC temperatures. After 48 hours they were subjected to shear bond strength testing in occluso-gingival direction, using an MTS 810 Universal Testing Machine with load speed of 0.5 mm/min.Result: Mean shear bond strength was significantly more in samples bonded with adhesion booster (14.792±3.805 Mpa) as compared to conventional primers (11.327±4.047 Mpa). There was statistically significant difference in shear bond strength between the groups (p=0.001).Conclusion: The use of the adhesion booster significantly increased the bond strength of bracket bonded with fluoride-releasing composite.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saba Tohidkhah ◽  
Elham Ahmadi ◽  
Mahdi Abbasi ◽  
Reza Morvaridi Farimani ◽  
Ladan Ranjbar Omrani

Abstract Background: The aim of current study was to evaluate and compare the influence of Dycal, Lime-lite, Theracal LC, Biodentine, Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and Activa Bioactive as the pulp capping material on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin.Methods: A total of 70 extracted caries-free molars were randomly assigned to seven groups. Six test groups were covered with various protective liners: Dycal (GD), Theracal LC (GT), lime-lite (GL), Activa Bioactive (GA), Biodentine (GB), RMGIC (GR). The control group (GC)received no liner pretreatment. Each sample was bonded to resin composite using the total-etch tetric N bond adhesive. The samples were then tested for shear bond strength using the universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until bond failure occurred. The data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA test followed by the Tamhane post-hoc test for pairwise comparisons of the groupsResults: Independent of the type of the applied liner, all groups exhibited inferior SBS to dentine compared to the control group. GT and GR showed significantly higher shear bond strength than GB and GD, which showed the lowest shear bond strength. GL and GA also had significantly lower SBS results than GT. The mode of fracture was predominantly cohesive in GD, GB, and GT and adhesive in GA.Conclusion: This present study concludes that the bond strength of resin-composite to dentine can be affected differently using various types of liners.


2015 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 267-274
Author(s):  
Jacob John ◽  
Jithesh Kumar ◽  
Kishore Kumar ◽  
Vandana Solanki ◽  
Vinay Puttaswamy

Aims and Objectives This study was carried to evaluate the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with self-etching primer and moisture insensitive primer (MIP) and compare it with the conventional adhesive system. Materials and Methods A total of 90 extracted human premolar teeth were selected and divided into three groups of 30 teeth each with two sub groups (dry and wet), of 15 teeth each. Each group was bonded with three different types of bonding systems namely visible light cure Clearfil Liner Bond 2V, MIP and Transbond XT. These groups were named SD, MD and CD in dry conditions and SW, MW and CW in wet condition and each of these groups were color coded. The shear bond strength of the bonding system in each group was tested using Universal testing machine Instron (Instron model:4206, Instron Corporation, USA). Results In dry condition all three groups showed good bond strength. Self-etch primer showed the average highest bond strength, followed by Transbond XT and then MIP. In wet condition MIP has highest bond strength, followed by self-etching primer and Transbond XT. Conclusion Under dry conditions conventional primer is the material of choice. Under wet conditions, MIP showed the highest bond strength and hence can be considered to be a material of choice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Menna Ahmed ElGendy ◽  
Ihab Mosleh ◽  
Hanaa Zaghloul

Objective: the purpose of the study was to evaluate the micro-shear bond strength of different cements to translucent zirconia before and after thermocycling aging. Material and methods: Twelve translucent zirconia ceramic discs were used in the study. Specimens were sandblasted using 50 ‎μm aluminum oxide (Al2O3) particles. The specimens were divided into three groups (n = 4) according to the cement type: Panavia resin cement (control group), resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI), and Activa bioactive cement. Each group was further sub-divided into two equal subgroups (n = 2) according to whether the specimens were subjected to thermocycling or not. Thermocycling was performed in distilled water at 5000 cycles between 5 oC - 55 oC. The micro-shear bond strength test (μSBS) was measured using universal testing machine. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare between the three cements. Dunn’s test was used for pair-wise comparisons when Kruskal-Wallis test is significant. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare between micro-shear bond strength before and after thermocycling P ≤ 0.05. Results: In non-aged subgroups, there was no significant difference between Panavia and Activa; both showed significantly the highest mean μSBS values (22.9 MPa, 31.3 MPa respectively). While, RMGI showed the lowest μSBS values (4.7 MPa).  In thermocycled subgroups, Panavia showed significantly the highest mean μSBS values (32.2 MPa). There was no significant difference between RMGI and Activa; both showed the lowest significant mean μSBS values (3.2 MPa and 8.7 MPa respectively). Conclusions: RMGI and Activa couldn’t be considered long-term reliable materials for cementing zirconia. However, Panavia provided the most durable bond to zirconia.KEYWORDSBioactive cement; Micro-shear bond strength; Resin cement; Translucent zirconia.


2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 637-643 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Nirupama ◽  
Sarasa Kavitha ◽  
Josy Jacob ◽  
K Balaji ◽  
B Srinivasan ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength of hydrophilic materials like Transbond MIP with Assure-fluoride releasing light cure sealant paste system (Reliance orthodontic product), Enhance Lc-adhesion booster (Reliance Orthodontics) Prime and Bond NT–one step adhesive with nanotechnology (Dentsply Product India) with Transbond XT as the control group. Materials and methods The study was conducted on 180 extracted human premolar teeth which were divided into five main groups. Each group contained 36 teeth, which were further subdivided into three subgroups containing 12 teeth. The teeth were bonded in three different surface environments namely dry, contaminated with artificial saliva and reprimed after contamination with artificial salvia. The brackets were bonded and cured. The shear bond strength was tested using Instron universal testing machine (4501). Results The results were subjected to statistical analysis like 3 factorial ANOVA and compared to post-hoc using the Student Newman levels test. The residual resin on the tooth surface after debonding was evaluated with adhesive remnant index. Clinical significance The results revealed that in situations in which moisture contamination is critical there is distinct advantage in using hydrophilic primers. How to cite this article Nirupama C, Kavitha S, Jacob J, Balaji K, Srinivasan B, Murugesan R, Krishnaswamy NR. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Hydrophilic Bonding Materials: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(5): 637-643.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document