A Critique of Bond Strength Testing in Orthodontics

1994 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel A. Fox ◽  
John F. McCabe ◽  
John G. Buckley
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
New Products ◽  
Standard Technique ◽  
Strength Testing ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Test Procedures ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Number Of Publications

The literature contains a large number of publications on in vitro bond strength testing of materials used in orthodontics. The results are often quoted by manufacturers to support their products. Little attention has been paid to the detail of the test procedures used. However, a review of the literature revealed a large variation in the methods used for bond strength testing in orthodontics making comparison of papers difficult and often impossible. The case for a possible standard technique is suggested. It is hoped that this will lead to more meaningful testing of new products, which will produce more reliable guidance for the clinical orthodontist.

scholarly journals Shear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Materials used for Bonding Orthodontic Brackets : A Comparative in vitro Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
Muzin Shahi Shaik ◽  
Snigdha Pattanaik ◽  
Sudhakar Pathuri ◽  
Arunachalam Sivakumar
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Test Group ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Universal Testing ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Adhesive Materials

Introduction: Bond strength is an important property and determines the amount of force delivered and treatment duration in orthodontics. Many light-cured bonding materials are being used; but it is required to determine the most efficient one withdesired bond strength. Objective: To determine and compare the shear bond strength of three visible light-cured composites (Transbond XT, Heliositand Enlight) and two self-cured composites (Rely-a-bond and Concise). Materials & Method: 100 extracted premolars were collected and randomly divided into 5 test groups of different adhesives. Brackets were bonded to the teeth in each test group with the respective adhesive according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Each specimen was debonded using Universal Testing Machine and the shear bond strength for each specimen was calculated. All the groups were compared by ANOVA one-way test. Results: There were statistically significant differences among the five groups (P<0.05). The shear bond strength of Enlight (13.92 ± 3.92) is similar to Transbond XT (14.30 ± 4.35). Conclusion: Light cure composites showed higher bond strength than self cure composites.

scholarly journals Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Caroline Silva Gama ◽  
Andre Guaraci de Vito Moraes ◽  
Lilyan Cardoso Yamasaki ◽  
Alessandro Dourado Loguercio ◽  
Ceci Nunes Carvalho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Flexural Strength ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Flexural Modulus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Contraction Stress ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Flowable Composites

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vitro the shear bond strength to enamel, flexural strength, flexural modulus, and contraction stress of one orthodontic composite and two flowable composites. Orthodontic brackets were bonded to 45 human maxillary premolars with the composites Transbond XT, Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow and tested for shear bond strength. For measurement of flexural strength and flexural modulus, specimens were fabricated and tested under flexion. For the contraction stress test, cylindrical specimens were tested and an extensometer determined the height of the specimens. The data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The shear bond strength values were significantly lower (p<0.05) for the flowable composites compared with the orthodontic composite. For the flexural strength, no statistically significant difference was found among the composites (p>0.05) while the flexural modulus was significantly higher (p<0.05) for Transbond XT than for Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow. The orthodontic composite presented significantly lower contraction stress values than the flowable composites (p<0.05). The light-activated orthodontic composite material presented higher flexural modulus and shear bond strength and lower contraction stress than both flowable composites.

Shear Bond Strength of a Resin Composite to Six Pulp Capping Materials Used in Primary Teeth

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-239
Author(s):  
Latifa Alhowaish ◽  
Fouad Salama ◽  
Mohammed Al-Harbi ◽  
Mohamad Abumoatti
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Bond Failure ◽  
Pulp Capping ◽  
Machine Failure ◽  
Materials Used

Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the shear bond strength (SBS) and bond failure types of a resin-composite to six pulp-capping materials used in primary teeth. Study design: Eight-disc specimens from each pulp-capping material (6 groups) to bond to Filtek™ Z350 XT Flowable using a standard PVC tube (2×2mm). All groups were prepared according to the instruction of the manufacturer. The SBS was measured with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min using a universal testing machine. Failure mode evaluation was completed using Digital Microscope by two independent examiners. Results: Urbical LC® showed the highest SBS (Mean±SD) followed by ProRoot® MTA and TheraCal LC® (35.422±2.910, 22.114±2.515, and 21.175±1.983) respectively. ANOVA showed significant differences between all groups (P=0.0001). Urbical LC® and Photac™ Fil QuickAplicap™ were statistically significant different from all other pulp-capping materials groups. ProRoot® MTA was statistically significant different than Biodentine® (P=0.0001) and Photac™ Fil (P=0.0001). The total number of bond failure was recorded for cohesive B failure/cohesive in the pulp-capping material (14) and adhesive failure (14). Conclusion: Most of the tested pulp-capping materials bonded to Filtek™ Z350 XT demonstrated clinically acceptable and high SBS. Urbical LC showed the highest SBS while Biodentine® showed the lowest SBS.

scholarly journals Effect of Conventional Adhesive Application or Co-Curing Technique on Dentin Bond Strength

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (24) ◽  
pp. 7664
Author(s):  
Josipa Vukelja ◽  
Eva Klarić Sever ◽  
Ivan Sever ◽  
Silvana Jukić Krmek ◽  
Zrinka Tarle
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Shear Mode ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Application Techniques ◽  
Curing Methods ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Curing Method ◽  
Adhesive Application

The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the effect of two different adhesive application methods on shear dentin bond strength (ISO 29022) using three various adhesive systems. A mid-coronal section of 77 intact third human molars with fully developed apices was made to create flat bonding substrates. The materials used in the study were Excite F (Ivoclar Vivadent), Prime&Bond Universal (Dentsply Sirona) and G-Premio Bond (GC). The application of each adhesion system was performed in two different ways. In the first group, the bonding agent was light cured immediately after the application (conventional method), while in the second group the adhesive and composite were cured concurrently (“co-curing” method). A total of 180 specimens were prepared (3 adhesives × 2 method of application × 30 specimens per experimental group), stored at 37 °C in distilled water and fractured in shear mode after 1 week. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Weibull statistics. The highest bond strength was obtained for Prime&Bond conventional (21.7 MPa), whilst the lowest bond strength was observed when co-curing was used (particularly, Excite F 12.2 MPa). The results showed a significant difference between conventional and co-curing methods in all materials. According to reliability analysis, the co-curing method diminished bond reliability. Different application techniques exhibit different bond strengths to dentin.

In Vitro Evaluation of Onlay Restorations on Primary Teeth

2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (12) ◽  
pp. 709-713
Author(s):  
Kadriye G.U. Güzel ◽  
Ayşe C. Altun ◽  
Zuhal Kirzioğlu
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Permanent Teeth ◽  
Primary Tooth ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bond Strengths ◽  
Materials Used

Purpose Many novel materials have been developed such as composite resin, ceramic, zircon or metal-supported ceramic for use in aesthetic restoration of primary teeth and permanent teeth with extensive crown damage. The aim of the present study was to compare microtensile bond strengths on materials using the microtensile bond strength test. Materials and methods The microtensile bond strength on the primary tooth dentin was measured on extracted primary teeth using an indirect method and fracture patterns were evaluated. Results The analysis of bond strengths using the Mann-Whitney U-test did not show significant difference between the rank averages of the compomer and composite resin (p = 0.741). The dentin sections, from which test samples were obtained, contributed to the bond strength; dentin samples obtained just above the pulp had lower bond strength, and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.005). The adhesive type fracture was the most prevalent fracture type for both materials. Conclusions When the chemical, physiological, and micromorphological differences between primary and permanent teeth are taken into consideration, the success of the materials used for restorations can be different between primary and permanent teeth. Therefore, materials used in the dentistry must be evaluated separately for primary teeth.

scholarly journals Stress relaxation properties of four orthodontic aligner materials: A 24-hour in vitro study

2016 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Lombardo ◽  
Elisa Martines ◽  
Valentina Mazzanti ◽  
Angela Arreghini ◽  
Francesco Mollica ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Single Layer ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Constant Load ◽  
Strength Testing ◽  
Stress Release ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
F22 Aligner ◽  
Over Time

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the stress release properties of four thermoplastic materials used to make orthodontic aligners when subjected to 24 consecutive hours of deflection. Materials and Methods: Four types of aligner materials (two single and two double layered) were selected. After initial yield strength testing to characterize the materials, each sample was subjected to a constant load for 24 hours in a moist, temperature-regulated environment, and the stress release over time was measured. The test was performed three times on each type of material. Results: All polymers analyzed released a significant amount of stress during the 24-hour period. Stress release was greater during the first 8 hours, reaching a plateau that generally remained constant. The single-layer materials, F22 Aligner polyurethane (Sweden & Martina, Due Carrare, Padova, Italy) and Duran polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified (SCHEU, Iserlohn, Germany), exhibited the greatest values for both absolute stress and stress decay speed. The double-layer materials, Erkoloc-Pro (Erkodent, Pfalzgrafenweiler, Germany) and Durasoft (SCHEU), exhibited very constant stress release, but at absolute values up to four times lower than the single-layer samples tested. Conclusions: Orthodontic aligner performance is strongly influenced by the material of their construction. Stress release, which may exceed 50% of the initial stress value in the early hours of wear, may cause significant changes in the behavior of the polymers at 24 hours from the application of orthodontic loads, which may influence programmed tooth movement.

Method for Immediate Measurement of In Vitro Bond Strength of Bonded Direct Esthetic Restorations

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 11-23
Author(s):  
Yousef Fouad Talic
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Standardized Testing ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Strength Testing ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Testing Protocol ◽  
Detailed Method ◽  
Fundamental Understanding ◽  
Bond Strengths

Abstract There are many different ways to measure the bond strength of direct esthetic restorations to various dental substrates. Unfortunately, most methods cannot measure bond strengths immediately after a restoration has been placed. This lack of clinically-relevant information seriously affects the clinician's ability to select and use various bonding agents and procedures. The aim of this article is to provide a very detailed method for immediate measurement of in vitro bond strengths of direct bonded esthetic restorations. It focuses on the steps that should be taken to select and prepare various tooth substrates for bond strength testing, the steps to “restore” various tooth substrates, and to measure the immediate in vitro bond strength. A fundamental understanding of a standardized testing protocol should provide clinicians with a clearer appreciation of bond strengths associated with various bonding procedures. Citation Talic YF. Method for Immediate Measurement of In Vitro Bond Strength of Bonded Direct Esthetic Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2003 August;(4)3:011-023.

The inadequacy of in-vitro orthodontic bond strength testing in clinical application

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjeev K. Verma ◽  
Sandhya Maheshwari ◽  
Mohd. Tariq ◽  
Saba Khan
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Clinical Application ◽  
Strength Testing

In-vitro orthodontic bond strength testing: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2010 ◽  
Vol 137 (5) ◽  
pp. 615-622.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina J. Finnema ◽  
Mutlu Özcan ◽  
Wendy J. Post ◽  
Yijin Ren ◽  
Pieter U. Dijkstra
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Strength Testing

scholarly journals In vitro Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Materials Used in Bonding 3x3 Lingual Retainer

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-405
Author(s):  
Matheus Melo Pithon ◽  
Caio de Souza Ferraz ◽  
Gabriel Couto de Oliveira ◽  
Pedro Henrique Bomfim Magalhaes
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Strength Of Materials ◽  
In Vitro Evaluation ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Lingual Retainer
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document