Indirect bonding technique in orthodontics

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 3, 153 - 60, 18.08.2016

Kübra Yıldırım , Banu Sağlam Aydınatay

https://doi.org/10.17214/aot.47396

Cited By: 1

Öz

‘Direct Bonding Technique’ which allows the fixed orthodontic appliances to be directly bonded to teeth without using bands decreased the clinic time for bracket bonding and increased esthetics and oral hygiene during orthodontic treatment. However, mistakes in bracket positioning were observed due to decreased direct visual sight and access to posterior teeth. ‘Indirect Bonding Technique’ was developed for eliminating these problems. Initially, decreased bond strength, higher bond failure rate, periodontal tissue irritation, compromised oral hygiene and increased laboratory time were the main disadvantages of this technique when compared to direct bonding. The newly developed materials and modified techniques help to eliminate these negative consequences. Today, the brackets bonded with indirect technique have similar bond strength with brackets bonded directly. Moreover, indirect and direct bonding techniques have similar effects on periodontal tissues. However, indirect bonding technique requires more attention and precision in laboratory and clinical stage, and has higher cost. Orthodontist's preference between these two bonding techniques may differ according to time spent in laboratory and clinic, cost, patient comfort and personal opinion.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dental bonding, orthodontic adhesives, orthodontic brackets

Ortodontide indirekt yapıştırma tekniği

Öz

Sabit ortodontik elemanların, bantlara gereksinim olmaksızın doğrudan dişler üzerine yapıştırıldığı ‘Direkt Yapıştırma Tekniği’ ile braketleme için klinikte harcanan süre kısaltılmış, daha estetik ve hijyenik bir ortodontik tedavi uygulama imkanı elde edilmiştir. Ancak bu teknikte, özellikle arka dişlere doğrudan görüş ve ulaşım sorunu gibi sebeplerle braket konumlarında hatalarla karşılaşılmıştır. Bu hataların önlenmesi amacıyla ‘İndirekt Yapıştırma Tekniği’ geliştirilmiştir. Bu tekniğin ilk geliştirildiği yıllarda gözlenen direkt yapıştırılan braketlere kıyasla bağlanma dayanımının daha az olması, yüksek braket kopma oranları, braketlerin etrafından taşan adezivlerin periodontal dokuları irrite etmesi ve oral hijyeni olumsuz etkilemesi, laboratuvar aşamasının uzun ve zaman alıcı olması gibi pek çok olumsuz özelliği günümüzde geliştirilen materyaller ve tekniklerle birlikte elimine edilmiştir. Günümüzde indirekt teknik ile yapıştırılan braketler, direkt yapıştırılan braketlerle benzer bağlanma dayanımı göstermektedir. Ayrıca indirekt ve direkt yapıştırma tekniklerinin, periodontal dokular üzerine etkileri de benzerdir. Ancak indirekt yapıştırma tekniği, hem laboratuvar hem de klinik aşamalarında daha fazla özen ve hassasiyet gerektirmektedir ve maliyeti daha yüksektir. Hekimin bu iki yapıştırma yönteminden hangisini seçeceği; laboratuvar süresi, klinik süresi, maliyet, hasta konforu gibi etkenler ve kendi kişisel tercihine bağlı olarak değişebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Diş yapıştırma, ortodontik adezivler, ortodontik braketler

Kaynakça

• Demir D. İndirekt bonding ile yapıştırılan braketlerin bağlanma kuvvetleri üzerine farklı ışık kaynaklarının etkisi: laboratuar ve klinik çalışması [tez]. Adana: Çukurova Üniversitesi; 2007.
• Hodge TM, Spary DJ. A randomized clinical trial comparing the accuracy of direct versus indirect bracket placement. J Orthod 2000;31:132-7
• Koo BC, Chung GH, Vanarsdall RL. Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement between direct and indirect bonding techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116:346-51.
• Deahl ST, Salome N, Hatch JP, Rugh JD. Practice-based comparison of direct and indirect bonding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:738-42.
• Thiyagarajah S, Spary DJ, Rock WP. A clinical comparison of bracket bond failures in association with direct and indirect bonding. J Orthod 2006;33:198-204.
• Bozelli JV, Bigliazzi R, Barbosa HA, Ortolani CL, Bertoz FA, Faltin Junior K. Comparative study on direct and indirect bracket bonding techniques regarding time length and bracket detachment. Dental Press J Orthod 2013;18:51-7.
• Miles PG. A comparison of retention rates of brackets with thermally-cured and light-cured custom bases in indirect bonding procedures. Aust Orthod J 2000;16:115-7.
• Read MJF, O’Brien KD. A clinical trial of an indirect bonding technique with a visible light- cured adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:259-62.
• Aguirre MJ, King GJ, Waldron JM. Assessment of bracket placement and bond strength when comparing direct bonding to indirect bonding techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1982;82:269-76.
• Miles PG, Weyant RJ. A comparison of two indirect bonding adhesives. Angle Orthod 2005;75:1019-23.
• Miles PG, Weyant RJ. A clinical comparison of two chemically-cured adhesives used for indirect bonding. J Orthod 2003;30:331-6.
• Linn BJ, Berzins DW, Dhuru VB, Bradley TG. A comparison of bond strength between direct and indirect bonding methods. Angle Orthod 2006;76:289-94.
• Yi GK, Dunn WJ, Taloumise LJ. Shear bond strength comparison between direct and indirect bonded orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:577-81.
• Hocevar RA, Vincent HF. Indirect versus direct bonding: bond strength and failure location. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:367-71.
• Klocke A, Tadic D, Vaziri F, Kahl-Nieke B. Custom base preaging in indirect bonding. Angle Orthod 2004;74:106-11.
• Årtun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1984;85:333-40.
• Daub J, Berzins DW, Linn BJ, Bradley TG. Bond strength of direct and indirect bonded brackets after thermocycling. Angle Orthod 2006;76:295-300.
• Klocke A, Shi J, Kahl-Nieke B, Bismayer U. Bond strength with custom base indirect bonding techniques. Angle Orthod 2003;73:176-80.
• Read MJF, Pearson AI. A method for light-cured indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 1998;32:502-3.
• Sinha PK, Nanda RS, Ghosh J. A thermal-cured, flouride-releasing indirect bonding system. J Clin Orthod 1995;29:97-100. 32.
• Castilla AE, Crowe JJ, Moses JR, Wang M, Ferracane JL, Covell DA. Measurement and comparison of bracket transfer accuracy of five indirect bonding techniques. Angle Orthod 2014;84:607–14.
• Ciuffolo F, Epifania E, Duranti G, De Luca V, Raviglia D, Rezza S, et al. Rapid prototyping: a new method of preparing trays for indirect bonding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:75-7.
• Moskowitz EM. Indirect bonding with a thermal cured composite. Semin Orthod 2007;13:69-74.
• Koga M, Watanabe K, Koga T. Quick indirect bonding system (Quick IDBS): an indirect bonding technique using a double-silicone bracket transfer tray. Semin Orthod 2007;13:11-8. 28.
• Kasrovi P, Timmins S, Shen A. A new approach to indirect bonding using light-cure composites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;6:652-6.
• Kim TW, Bae GS, Cho J. New indirect bonding method for lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 2000;34:348-50.
• Kim TW. Indirect bonding system in lingual orthodontics. Korean J Orthod 2002;32:38-45.
• Kyung HM, Park HS, Sung JH. The mushroom bracket positioner for lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 2002;36:320-8.
• Matsuna I, Okuda S, Nodera Y. The hybrid core system for indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 2003;37:160-1.
• Hiro T, Takemoto K. Resin core indirect bonding system: improvement of lingual orthodontic treatment. J Jpn Orthod Soc 1998;57:83- 91.
• Echarri P, Kim T. Double transfer trays for indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 2004;38:8-13.
• Collins J. A precise and predictable laboratory procedure for indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 2000;34:702-5.
• McCrostie HS. Indirect bonding simplified. J Clin Orthod 2003;37:248-51.
• Milne JW, Andreasen GF, Jakobsen JR. Bond strength comparison: a simplified indirect technique versus direct placement of brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;96:8-15.
• Keim RG, Gottlieb EL, Nelson AH. 2002 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures. Part 1 Results and trends. J Clin Orhod 2002;36:553-68.
• Polat O, Karaman AI, Buyukyilmaz T. In vitro evaluation of shear bond strengths and in vivo analysis of bond survival of indirect-bonding resins. Angle Orthod 2004;74:405-9.
• Moskowitz EM, Knight LD, Sheridan JJ, Esmay T, Tovilo K. A new look at indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 1996 ;30:277-81.
• Zachrisson BU, Brobakken BO. Clinical comparison of direct versus indirect bonding with different bracket types and adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1978;74:62-78.
• Zachrisson BU, Büyükyilmaz T. Bonding in orthodontics. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL Jr, Vig KW, eds. Orthodontics, Current Principles and Techniques, 4th edn. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2005. p. 579-659.
• White L. A new and improved indirect bonding technique. J Clin Orthod 1999;33:17-23.
• Hickham JH. Predictable indirect bonding. J Clin Orthod 1993;27:215-7.
• Thomas RG. Indirect bonding: simplicity in action. J Clin Orthod 1979;13:93-105.
• Silverman E, Cohen M. A report on a major improvement in the indirect bonding technique. J Clin Orthod 1975;9:270-6.
• Harari D, Aunni E, Gillis I, Redlich M. A new multipurpose dental adhesive for orthodontic use: in vitro bond-strength study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;118:307-10.
• Newman GV. Adhesive and orthodontic plastic attachments. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1969;56:573-8.
• Weisser JI. A successful method for bonding stainless steel brackets and auxiliaries. J Clin Orthod 1973;7:637-45.
• Buonocore MG. Adhesive sealing of pits and fissures for caries prevention with the use of ultraviolet light. J Am Dent Assoc 1970;80:324-30.
• Silverman E, Cohen M, Gianelly AA, Dietz VS. A universal direct bonding system for both metal and plastic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1972;62:236-44.
• Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955;34:849-53.
• Sondhi A. Precise bracket placement: effective and efficient indirect bonding. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL Jr, Vig KWL, eds. Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques. 4th edn. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2005. p. 661-73.