scholarly journals Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel after application of a caries infiltrant

2014 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 645-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Mews ◽  
Matthias Kern ◽  
Robert Ciesielski ◽  
Helge Fischer-Brandies ◽  
Bernd Koos

ABSTRACT Objective:  To examine differences in the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets on differently mineralized enamel surfaces after applying a caries infiltrant or conventional adhesive. Materials and Methods:  A total of 320 bovine incisors were assigned to eight pretreated groups, and the shear force required for debonding was recorded. Residual adhesive was evaluated by light microscopy using the adhesive remnant index. Statistical analysis included Kolmogorov-Smirnov, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Scheffé tests. Results:  The highest bond strength (18.8 ± 4.4 MPa) was obtained after use of the caries infiltrant. More residual adhesive and fewer enamel defects were observed on infiltrated enamel surfaces. Brackets on demineralized enamel produced multiple enamel defects. Conclusions:  Acceptable bond strengths were obtained with all material combinations. A caries-infiltrant applied before bracket fixation has a protective effect, especially on demineralized enamel.

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Scribante ◽  
Maria Francesca Sfondrini ◽  
Danilo Fraticelli ◽  
Paola Daina ◽  
Alessandra Tamagnone ◽  
...  

Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores of no-primer adhesives tested with two different bracket bases.Materials and Methods. 120 bovine permanent mandibular incisors were divided into 6 groups of 20 specimens. Two brackets (ODP) with different bracket bases (anchor pylons and 80-gauge mesh) were bonded to the teeth using a conventional adhesive (Transbond XT) and two different no-primer adhesive (Ortho Cem; Heliosit) systems. Groups were tested using an instron universal testing machine. SBS values were recorded. ARI scores were measured. SEM microphotographs were taken to evaluate the pattern of bracket bases. Statistical analysis was performed. ANOVA and Tukey tests were carried out for SBS values, whereas a chi-squared test was applied for ARI scores.Results. Highest bond strength values were reported with Transbond XT (with both pad designs), Ortho Cem bonded on anchor pylons and Heliosit on 80-gauge mesh. A higher frequency of ARI score of “3” was reported for Transbond XT groups. Other groups showed a higher frequency of ARI score “2” and “1.”Conclusion. Transbond XT showed the highest shear bond strength values with both pad designs.


2009 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 173-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmet Yalcin Gungor ◽  
Hakan Turkkahraman ◽  
Necdet Adanir ◽  
Huseyin Alkis

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)


2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sukumaran Anil ◽  
Farouk Ahmed Hussein ◽  
Mohammed Ibrahim Hashem ◽  
Elna P Chalisserry

ABSTRACT Objective The purpose of the current in-vivo study was to assess the effect of using 0.12% chlorhexidine (CHX) mouth rinse, before bonding, on shear bond strength of polycarbonate brackets bonded with composite adhesive. Subjects and methods Eighteen orthodontic patients with a mean age 21.41 ± 1.2 years, who were scheduled to have 2 or more first premolars extracted, were included in this study. Patients were referred for an oral prophylaxis program which included, in part, the use of a mouth rinse. Patients were divided into 2 groups, a test group of 9 patients who used 0.12% CHX gluconate mouth rinse twice daily and a control group of 9 patients who used a mouth rinse without CHX, but with same color. After 1 week, polycarbonate brackets were bonded to first premolars with Transbond XT composite adhesive. Premolars were extracted after 28 days and tested for shear bond strength on a universal testing machine. Student's t-test was used to compare shear bond strengths of both groups. Results No statistically significant difference was found in bond strengths’ values between both groups. The test group (with CHX) has mean shear bond strength of 14.21 ± 2.42 MPa whereas the control group (without CHX) revealed a mean strength of 14.52 ± 2.31 MPa. Conclusion The use of 0.12% CHX mouth rinse, for one week before bonding, did not affect the shear bond strength of polycarbonate brackets bonded with Transbond composite. Furthermore, these brackets showed clinically acceptable bond strength. How to cite this article Hussein FA, Hashem MI, Chalisserry EP, Anil S. The Impact of Chlorhexidine Mouth Rinse on the Bond Strength of Polycarbonate Orthodontic Brackets. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(6):688-692.


2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 564-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiya Endo ◽  
Rieko Ozoe ◽  
Koichi Shinkai ◽  
Makiko Aoyagi ◽  
Hiroomi Kurokawa ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: To ascertain the effects of repeated bonding on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with a fluoride-releasing and -recharging adhesive system with a self-etching primer in comparison with two other types of adhesive system. Materials and Methods: A total of 48 premolars were collected and divided equally into three groups of 16. Each group was assigned one of three adhesive systems: Transbond XT, Transbond Plus, or a fluoride-releasing and -recharging adhesive system, Beauty Ortho Bond. Shear bond strength was measured 24 hours after bracket bonding, with the bonding/debonding procedures repeated twice after the first debonding. A universal testing machine was used to determine shear bond strengths, and bracket/adhesive failure modes were evaluated with the adhesive remnant index after each debonding. Results: At every debonding sequence, all of these three adhesive systems had a shear bond strength of 6 MPa, which is a minimum requirement for clinical use. Transbond XT and Transbond Plus had significantly higher mean shear bond strengths than did Beauty Ortho Bond at each debonding. No significant differences in mean bond strength were observed between the three debondings in each adhesive system. Bond failure at the enamel/adhesive interface occurred more frequently in Beauty Ortho Bond than in Transbond XT or Transbond Plus. Conclusions: The fluoride-releasing and -recharging adhesive system with the self-etching primer (Beauty Ortho Bond) had clinically sufficient shear bond strength in repeated bracket bonding; this finding can help orthodontists to decrease the risk of damage to enamel at debonding.


2008 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona A. Montasser ◽  
James L. Drummond ◽  
Carla A. Evans

Abstract Objective: To compare rebonding of orthodontic brackets based on the hypothesis that no difference would be found between the adhesive systems with respect to shear bond strength, mode of failure, and clinical failure rates. Materials and Methods: The three adhesive systems included two self-etch primers (Transbond and M-Bond) and a conventional phosphoric acid etch (Rely-a-Bond). The sample size was 20 premolars for each adhesive system. The shear bond strength was tested 24 hours after bracket bonding with the bonding/debonding procedures repeated two times after the first debonding. Bond strength, adhesive remnant index (ARI), and failure sites were evaluated for each debonding. Statistical analysis consisted of a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Scheffè analysis. The clinical portion evaluated 15 patients over a 12-month period. Results: The mean shear bond strengths after the first, second, and third debondings for Rely-a-Bond were 8.4 ± 1.8, 10.3 ± 2.4, and 14.1 ± 3.3 MPa, respectively; for Transbond 11.1 ± 4.6, 13.6 ± 4.5, and 12.9 ± 4.4 MPa, respectively; and for M-Bond 8.7 ± 2.7, 10.4 ± 2.4, and 12.4 ± 3.4 MPa, respectively. After the three debondings the mean shear bond strength increased significantly from the first to the third debonding for Rely-a-Bond and M-bond (P ≤ .001), but did not change for Transbond (P = .199). Conclusions: The original hypothesis is not rejected. The two self-etching primers showing higher or comparable bond strength to the conventional phosphoric etch with less adhesive remnant on the enamel surface after the first debonding. With repeated bonding/debonding, the differences in the bond strength, ARI, and failure site were not significantly different. There was no difference in the clinical performance of the three adhesive systems (P = .667).


2011 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Francesca Sfondrini ◽  
Esmeralda Xheka ◽  
Andrea Scribante ◽  
Paola Gandini ◽  
Giuseppe Sfondrini

Abstract Objective: To test the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the shear bond strength (SBS) and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores of new vs reconditioned self-ligating brackets. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty permanent extracted bovine teeth were embedded in resin blocks. Three different new and reconditioned self-ligating orthodontic brackets (Smart Clip [3M Unitek]; Quick [Forestadent]; and Damon3MX [Ormco]) were tested. Scanning electron microphotographs of the different new (groups 1, 3, and 5) and reconditioned (groups 2, 4, and 6) bracket bases were taken before starting the experiments. Brackets were then bonded to the teeth using an orthodontic adhesive and were then tested in shear mode using an Instron Universal Testing Machine. ARI scores were then recorded. Statistical analysis was performed to determine significant differences in SBS and ARI Scores. Results: Smart Clip and Damon3MX reconditioned brackets showed significantly lower SBS than did new ones. On the contrary, Quick reconditioned brackets showed significantly higher SBS than did new ones. No significant differences in ARI scores were found after the reconditioning process for the three different brackets tested. Conclusion: The in-office reconditioning procedure alters the SBS of self-ligating brackets, although SBS values still remain clinically acceptable.


2020 ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Sonali Mahadevia ◽  
Bhavya Trivedi ◽  
Arth Patel ◽  
Mauli Shah ◽  
Vaishali Gayakwad

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the shear bond strength of indirectly and directly bonded orthodontic brackets. Ninety Methods: extracted human premolars were collected and divided into two groups. In both the groups, direct bonding (group 1) and indirect bonding (group 2) a light-cured adhesive and primer (ENLIGHT LV) was used. Forty hours after bonding, the samples were De-bonded. Results: Mean shear bond strengths were 12.33, and 12.18 MPA for groups 1, and 2, respectively. The Independent Sample T-Test showed no signicant difference in mean bond strength between groups (P =.667). Conclusion: The result also showed that there was no statistically signicant difference in the shear bond strength between the direct and indirect bonding methods.


2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (5) ◽  
pp. 945-950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ding Xiaojun ◽  
Lu Jing ◽  
Guo Xuehua ◽  
Ruan Hong ◽  
Yu Youcheng ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the effect of casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) paste on shear bond strength and debonding failure modes of orthodontic brackets. Materials and Methods: Freshly extracted premolars were randomly divided into four groups (n =18) as follows: in groups 1 and 3, the enamel was treated with a solution of CPP-ACP dissolved in artificial saliva; groups 2 and 4 served as controls, and the enamel was treated with artificial saliva. After conventional acid etching, in groups 1 and 2, brackets were bonded using a light-cured bonding system (Blugloo); while in groups 3 and 4, brackets were bonded using a conventional bonding system (Unite Bonding Adhesive). Bonded specimens were subjected to thermal cycling for 1000 cycles before debonding procedures. After debonding, teeth and brackets were examined under a stereomicroscope at 10× magnification to determine whether any adhesive remained, in accordance with the adhesive remnant index. The acid-etched enamel surfaces were also observed using scanning electron microscopy after treatment with and without CPP-ACP paste. Results: The shear bond strengths of group 1 were significantly higher than those seen in group 2 (P &lt; .01). There was no significant difference in the shear bond strengths of groups 3 and 4 (P &gt; .05). Scanning electron microscopic observation showed that the pretreated enamel surface was rougher than that of the control surface after acid etching. Conclusion: The use of CPP-ACP can be considered as an alternative prophylactic application in orthodontic practice since it did not compromise bracket bond strength.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document