Cargando…

Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and composite resin for bonding metal and ceramic brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight human premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were divided into 4 groups (n=22). I...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yassaei, Soghra, Davari, Abdolrahim, Goldani Moghadam, Mahjobeh, Kamaei, Ahmad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290756/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628663
_version_ 1782352296049377280
author Yassaei, Soghra
Davari, Abdolrahim
Goldani Moghadam, Mahjobeh
Kamaei, Ahmad
author_facet Yassaei, Soghra
Davari, Abdolrahim
Goldani Moghadam, Mahjobeh
Kamaei, Ahmad
author_sort Yassaei, Soghra
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and composite resin for bonding metal and ceramic brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight human premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were divided into 4 groups (n=22). In groups 1 and 2, 22 metal and ceramic brackets were bonded using composite resin (Transbond XT), respectively. Twenty-two metal and ceramic brackets in groups 3 and 4, respectively were bonded using RMGI (Fuji Ortho LC, Japan). After photo polymerization, the teeth were stored in water and thermocycled (500 cycles between 5° and 55°). The SBS value of each sample was determined using a Universal Testing Machine. The amount of residual adhesive remaining on each tooth was evaluated under a stereomicroscope. Statistical analyses were done using two-way ANOVA. RESULTS: RMGI bonded brackets had significantly lower SBS value compared to composite resin bonded groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between metal and ceramic brackets bonded with either the RMGI or composite resin. The comparison of the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores between the groups indicated that the bracket failure mode was significantly different among groups (P<0.001) with more adhesive remaining on the teeth bonded with composite resin. CONCLUSION: RMGIs have significantly lower SBS compared to composite resin for orthodontic bonding purposes; however the provided SBS is still within the clinically acceptable range.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4290756
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42907562015-01-27 Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding Yassaei, Soghra Davari, Abdolrahim Goldani Moghadam, Mahjobeh Kamaei, Ahmad J Dent (Tehran) Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and composite resin for bonding metal and ceramic brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight human premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were divided into 4 groups (n=22). In groups 1 and 2, 22 metal and ceramic brackets were bonded using composite resin (Transbond XT), respectively. Twenty-two metal and ceramic brackets in groups 3 and 4, respectively were bonded using RMGI (Fuji Ortho LC, Japan). After photo polymerization, the teeth were stored in water and thermocycled (500 cycles between 5° and 55°). The SBS value of each sample was determined using a Universal Testing Machine. The amount of residual adhesive remaining on each tooth was evaluated under a stereomicroscope. Statistical analyses were done using two-way ANOVA. RESULTS: RMGI bonded brackets had significantly lower SBS value compared to composite resin bonded groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between metal and ceramic brackets bonded with either the RMGI or composite resin. The comparison of the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores between the groups indicated that the bracket failure mode was significantly different among groups (P<0.001) with more adhesive remaining on the teeth bonded with composite resin. CONCLUSION: RMGIs have significantly lower SBS compared to composite resin for orthodontic bonding purposes; however the provided SBS is still within the clinically acceptable range. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2014-05 2014-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4290756/ /pubmed/25628663 Text en Copyright © Dental Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0), which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
spellingShingle Original Article
Yassaei, Soghra
Davari, Abdolrahim
Goldani Moghadam, Mahjobeh
Kamaei, Ahmad
Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title_full Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title_fullStr Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title_short Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding
title_sort comparison of shear bond strength of rmgi and composite resin for orthodontic bracket bonding
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290756/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628663
work_keys_str_mv AT yassaeisoghra comparisonofshearbondstrengthofrmgiandcompositeresinfororthodonticbracketbonding
AT davariabdolrahim comparisonofshearbondstrengthofrmgiandcompositeresinfororthodonticbracketbonding
AT goldanimoghadammahjobeh comparisonofshearbondstrengthofrmgiandcompositeresinfororthodonticbracketbonding
AT kamaeiahmad comparisonofshearbondstrengthofrmgiandcompositeresinfororthodonticbracketbonding