Cargando…

Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Salama, Fouad, Alrejaye, Hessa, Aldosari, Malak, Almosa, Naif
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6004780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29963507
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_158_17
_version_ 1783332582531792896
author Salama, Fouad
Alrejaye, Hessa
Aldosari, Malak
Almosa, Naif
author_facet Salama, Fouad
Alrejaye, Hessa
Aldosari, Malak
Almosa, Naif
author_sort Salama, Fouad
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty premolars were randomly allocated into four groups, 10 teeth/group. New and rebonded brackets were bonded to sound and cleaned enamel surface, and then were subjected to thermocycling. The bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Remaining adhesives on enamel after bracket debonding was scored independently by two investigators who were not aware of the four different groups, using adhesive remnant index (ARI). RESULTS: There was a statistical significant difference in SBS of the four groups (P = 0.005). SBS values were significantly higher with cleaned enamel surfaces after adhesive removal compared to sound enamel. SBS was significantly higher for rebonded brackets, when compared with the new brackets. No significant difference was found between the two adhesives types. The level of agreement between the two raters was higher toward the classification of higher categories of ARI (scores 5 and 6) with agreement percentage 91.7% and 100%, respectively. There was more adhesive remained among resin-composite groups. CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength of debonded sandblasted stainless-steel brackets was higher than new brackets. Resin-composite and RMGI orthodontic adhesives used in this study exhibited sufficient SBS values for bonding brackets to sound and cleaned enamel and comparable to each other.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6004780
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60047802018-06-29 Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces Salama, Fouad Alrejaye, Hessa Aldosari, Malak Almosa, Naif J Orthod Sci Original Article OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty premolars were randomly allocated into four groups, 10 teeth/group. New and rebonded brackets were bonded to sound and cleaned enamel surface, and then were subjected to thermocycling. The bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Remaining adhesives on enamel after bracket debonding was scored independently by two investigators who were not aware of the four different groups, using adhesive remnant index (ARI). RESULTS: There was a statistical significant difference in SBS of the four groups (P = 0.005). SBS values were significantly higher with cleaned enamel surfaces after adhesive removal compared to sound enamel. SBS was significantly higher for rebonded brackets, when compared with the new brackets. No significant difference was found between the two adhesives types. The level of agreement between the two raters was higher toward the classification of higher categories of ARI (scores 5 and 6) with agreement percentage 91.7% and 100%, respectively. There was more adhesive remained among resin-composite groups. CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength of debonded sandblasted stainless-steel brackets was higher than new brackets. Resin-composite and RMGI orthodontic adhesives used in this study exhibited sufficient SBS values for bonding brackets to sound and cleaned enamel and comparable to each other. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6004780/ /pubmed/29963507 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_158_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Orthodontic Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Salama, Fouad
Alrejaye, Hessa
Aldosari, Malak
Almosa, Naif
Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_full Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_fullStr Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_full_unstemmed Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_short Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_sort shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6004780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29963507
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_158_17
work_keys_str_mv AT salamafouad shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT alrejayehessa shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT aldosarimalak shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT almosanaif shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces