Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Monocrystalline Ceramic Brackets and Residual Adhesive After Debonding

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shearbond strength SBS of metal and monocrystallineceramic brackets bonded with resin modified glassionomer cement RMGIC and conventional composite resins.Eighty maxillary first premolars were randomly divided into 4 groups. Metal brackets Victory Series, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA were used in the first and second groups, whereasmonocrystalline ceramic brackets were used in thethird and fourth groups Radiance Series,American Orthodontics, Sheboygen, WI, USA . Allteeth in the first and third groups were etched with37% orthophosphoric acid, rinsed with water for 20seconds, air dried and bonded with Transbond XT Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA .The brackets of second and fourth groups werebonded by using a one-step RMGIC Fuji OrthoLC, GC Europe, Leuven, Belgium . All specimenswere kept in distilled water for 24 hours at roomtemperature and SBS test was performed with aUniversal testing machine Instron Corp.,Norwood, MA, USA . Kruskal-Wallis and Tukeytests was used for the statistical analysis. Statistically significant differences were foundbetween the shear bond strength values of allgroups P

Keywords

• Orthodontic brackets, Shear bond strength, Adhesive remnant index

Monokristalin seramik braketlerin kesme bağlanma kuvvetlerinin ve kopma sonrası oluşan artık adeziv miktarının incelenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı rezin modifiye camiyonomer siman RMCIS ve kompozit ileyapıştırılan metal ve monokristalin seramik braketlerin kesme-bağlanma kuvvetlerini KBK değerlendirmekti. Seksen adet yeni çekilmiş maksiller 1. premolar diş rastgele olarak 4 gruba ayrıldı. Birinci ve 2.gruplarda metal Victory Series, 3M Unitek,Monrovia, CA, USA , 3. ve 4. gruplarda monokristalin seramik braketler American OrthodonticsRadiance Series, Sheboygen, WI, USA kullanıldı.Birinci ve 3. gruplarda dişler, %37’lik fosforik asitile 30 saniye asitlendikten sonra, 20 saniye boyunca yıkanmış, kurutulmuş ve kompozit adeziv sistem Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA ile braketler dişlere yapıştırıldı. İkinci ve 4. gruplarda ise, braketlerin yapıştırılmasında tek aşamalıRMCIS Fuji Ortho LC, GC Europe, Leuven,Belgium kullanıldı. Örnekler, 24 saat boyunca distile su içinde ve oda ısısında bekletildikten sonra,braketlerin kesme-bağlanma kuvvetleri, Universaltest cihazı Instron Corp., Norwood, MA, USA iledeğerlendirildi. İstatistik inceleme, Varyans analizi ANOVA ve Tukey testleri kullanılarak yapıldı

Keywords

• Ortodontik braketler, Kesme bağlanma kuvveti, Art›k adeziv endeksi

References

1. Newmann GV. Epoxy adhesives for ortho- dontic attachments: progress report. Am J Orthod 1965; 51: 901–12.
2. Joseph VP, Russouw E. The shear bond strength of stainless steel and ceramic brackets used with chemically and light-activated composite resins. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990; 97: 121-5.
3. Angolkar P, Kapila S, Duncanson JMG, Nanda R. Evaluation of friction between ceramic brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990; 98: 499-506.
4. Retief DH. Failure at the dentin adhesive- etched enamel interface. J Oral Rehabil 1974; 1: 265- 84.
5. Reynolds JR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975; 2: 171–8.
6. Holzmeier M, Schaubmayr M, Dasch W, Hirschfelder U. A new generation of self-etching adhesives: comparison with traditional acid etch technique. J Orofac Orthop 2008; 69: 78-93.
7. Bishara SE, Oonsombat C, Ajlouni R, Denehy G. The effect of saliva contamination on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets when using a self-etch primer. Angle Orthod 2002; 72: 554–7.
8. Wang WN, Meng CL. A study of bond strength between light- and self-cured orthodontic resin. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 101: 350–4.

9. Birnie D. Orthodontic materials update: Ceramic brackets. Br J Orthod 1990; 17: 71-5.
10. Sinha PK, Nanda RS. Esthetic orthodontic appliances and bonding concerns for adults. Dent Clin North Am 1997; 41: 89-109.
11. Redd TB, Shivapuja PK. Debonding cera- mic brackets effects on enamel. J Clin Orthod 1991; 25 475–81.
12. Forsberg CM, Hagberg C. Shear bond strength of ceramic brackets with chemical or mechanical retention, Br J Orthod 1992; 19: 183–9.
13. Elaut J, Asscherickx K, Vande Vannet B, Wehrbein H. Flowable composites for bonding lin- gual retainers. J Clin Orthod 2002; 36: 597–8.
14. Liu JK, Chung CH, Chang CY, Shieh DB. Bond strength and debonding characteristics of a new ceramic bracket. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 128: 761-5.
15. Harari D, Aunni E, Gillis I, Redlich M. A new multipurpose dental adhesive for orthodontic use: an in vitro bond strength study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118: 307–10.
16. Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid- etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 333-40.
17. Sunna S, Rock WP. Clinical performance of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems: a ran- domized clinical trial. Br J Orthod 1998; 25: 283-7.
18. Bearn DR, Aird JC, McCabe JF. Ex vivo bond strength of adhesive precoated metallic and ceramic brackets. Br J Orthod 1995; 22: 233–6.
19. Fernandez L, Canut JA. In vitro comparison of the retention capacity of new aesthetic brackets. Eur J Orthod 1999; 21: 71–7.
20. Fox N, McCabe J, Buckley J. A critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics. Br J Orthod 1994; 21: 33–43.
21. Harris A, Joseph V, Rossouw P. Shear peel bond strengths of esthetic orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 102: 215-9.
22. Pratten D, Popli K, Gemmane N, Gunsolley J. Frictional resistance of ceramic and stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990; 98: 398-403.
23. Al Shamsi A, Cunningham JL, Lamey PJ, Lynch E. Shear bond strength and residual adhesive after orthodontic bracket debonding. Angle Orthod 2005; 76: 694-9.
24. Redd TB, Shivapuja PK. Debonding cera- mic brackets: effects on enamel. J Clin Orthod 1991; 25: 475-81.