Cargando…

Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding

INTRODUCTION: Bond failure during fixed orthodontic treatment is a frequently occurring problem. As bracket rebonding is associated with reduced shear bond strength, the aim of the present investigation is to analyse the effect of different innovative rebonding systems to identify optimised rebondin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Knaup, Isabel, Böddeker, Antonia, Tempel, Katrin, Weber, Eva, Bartz, Jenny Rosa, Rückbeil, Marcia Viviane, Craveiro, Rogério Bastos, Wagner, Yvonne, Wolf, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7487826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32891153
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-020-00233-3
_version_ 1783581568747438080
author Knaup, Isabel
Böddeker, Antonia
Tempel, Katrin
Weber, Eva
Bartz, Jenny Rosa
Rückbeil, Marcia Viviane
Craveiro, Rogério Bastos
Wagner, Yvonne
Wolf, Michael
author_facet Knaup, Isabel
Böddeker, Antonia
Tempel, Katrin
Weber, Eva
Bartz, Jenny Rosa
Rückbeil, Marcia Viviane
Craveiro, Rogério Bastos
Wagner, Yvonne
Wolf, Michael
author_sort Knaup, Isabel
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Bond failure during fixed orthodontic treatment is a frequently occurring problem. As bracket rebonding is associated with reduced shear bond strength, the aim of the present investigation is to analyse the effect of different innovative rebonding systems to identify optimised rebonding protocols for orthodontic patient care. METHODS: Metallic brackets were bonded to the frontal enamel surfaces of 240 bovine lower incisors embedded in resin bases. Teeth were randomly divided into two major experimental groups: in group 1 a hydrophilic primer (Assure™ PLUS) was compared to commonly used orthodontic adhesives (Transbond XT™, BrackFix®, Grengloo™) and a zero control. In group 2 different rebonding systems were analysed using a hydrophilic primer (Assure™ PLUS), a methyl methacrylate-consisting primer (Plastic Conditioner) and a conventional adhesive (Transbond XT™). All teeth were tested for shear bond strength according to the DIN-13990 standard, the Adhesive Remnant Index and enamel fracture rate. RESULTS: The hydrophilic primer enhanced shear bond strength at first bonding (Assure™ PLUS 20.29 ± 4.95 MPa vs. Transbond XT™ 18.45 ± 2.57 MPa; BrackFix® 17 ± 5.2 MPa; Grengloo™ 19.08 ± 3.19 MPa; Meron 8.7 ± 3.9 MPa) and second bonding (Assure™ PLUS 16.76 ± 3.71 MPa vs. Transbond XT™ 13.06 ± 3.19 MPa). Using Plastic Conditioner did not seem to improve shear bond strength at rebonding (13.57 ± 2.94). When enamel etching was left out, required shear bond strength could not be achieved (Plastic Conditioner + Assure™ PLUS 8.12 ± 3.34 MPa; Plastic Conditioner: 3.7 ± 1.95 MPa). Hydrophilic priming systems showed decreased ARI-scores (second bonding: 2.63) and increased enamel fracture rates (first bonding: 55%; second bonding 21,05%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present study we found that rebonding strength could be compensated by the use of hydrophilic priming systems. The additional use of a methyl methacrylate-consisting primer does not seem to enhance shear bond strength. No etching approaches resulted in non-sufficient bond strength.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7487826
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74878262020-09-16 Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding Knaup, Isabel Böddeker, Antonia Tempel, Katrin Weber, Eva Bartz, Jenny Rosa Rückbeil, Marcia Viviane Craveiro, Rogério Bastos Wagner, Yvonne Wolf, Michael Head Face Med Research INTRODUCTION: Bond failure during fixed orthodontic treatment is a frequently occurring problem. As bracket rebonding is associated with reduced shear bond strength, the aim of the present investigation is to analyse the effect of different innovative rebonding systems to identify optimised rebonding protocols for orthodontic patient care. METHODS: Metallic brackets were bonded to the frontal enamel surfaces of 240 bovine lower incisors embedded in resin bases. Teeth were randomly divided into two major experimental groups: in group 1 a hydrophilic primer (Assure™ PLUS) was compared to commonly used orthodontic adhesives (Transbond XT™, BrackFix®, Grengloo™) and a zero control. In group 2 different rebonding systems were analysed using a hydrophilic primer (Assure™ PLUS), a methyl methacrylate-consisting primer (Plastic Conditioner) and a conventional adhesive (Transbond XT™). All teeth were tested for shear bond strength according to the DIN-13990 standard, the Adhesive Remnant Index and enamel fracture rate. RESULTS: The hydrophilic primer enhanced shear bond strength at first bonding (Assure™ PLUS 20.29 ± 4.95 MPa vs. Transbond XT™ 18.45 ± 2.57 MPa; BrackFix® 17 ± 5.2 MPa; Grengloo™ 19.08 ± 3.19 MPa; Meron 8.7 ± 3.9 MPa) and second bonding (Assure™ PLUS 16.76 ± 3.71 MPa vs. Transbond XT™ 13.06 ± 3.19 MPa). Using Plastic Conditioner did not seem to improve shear bond strength at rebonding (13.57 ± 2.94). When enamel etching was left out, required shear bond strength could not be achieved (Plastic Conditioner + Assure™ PLUS 8.12 ± 3.34 MPa; Plastic Conditioner: 3.7 ± 1.95 MPa). Hydrophilic priming systems showed decreased ARI-scores (second bonding: 2.63) and increased enamel fracture rates (first bonding: 55%; second bonding 21,05%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present study we found that rebonding strength could be compensated by the use of hydrophilic priming systems. The additional use of a methyl methacrylate-consisting primer does not seem to enhance shear bond strength. No etching approaches resulted in non-sufficient bond strength. BioMed Central 2020-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7487826/ /pubmed/32891153 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-020-00233-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Knaup, Isabel
Böddeker, Antonia
Tempel, Katrin
Weber, Eva
Bartz, Jenny Rosa
Rückbeil, Marcia Viviane
Craveiro, Rogério Bastos
Wagner, Yvonne
Wolf, Michael
Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title_full Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title_fullStr Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title_full_unstemmed Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title_short Analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
title_sort analysing the potential of hydrophilic adhesive systems to optimise orthodontic bracket rebonding
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7487826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32891153
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-020-00233-3
work_keys_str_mv AT knaupisabel analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT boddekerantonia analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT tempelkatrin analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT webereva analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT bartzjennyrosa analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT ruckbeilmarciaviviane analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT craveirorogeriobastos analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT wagneryvonne analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding
AT wolfmichael analysingthepotentialofhydrophilicadhesivesystemstooptimiseorthodonticbracketrebonding