Early shear bond strength of a one-step self-adhesive on orthodontic brackets

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a self-adhesive universal cement, RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany), can be used successfully to bond orthodontic brackets to enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human molars were cleaned, mounted, and randomly divided into two groups: 20 orthodontic brackets were bonded to teeth using RelyX Unicem, and 20 brackets were bonded using the Transbond XT (3M Unitex, Monrovia, Calif) adhesive system. The teeth were debonded within 30 minutes after initial bonding using a universal testing machine. After debonding, the enamel surface was examined under 10x magnification to determine the amount of residual adhesive remaining on the tooth. Student's t-test was used to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of the two groups, and the chi-square test was used to compare the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores for the two adhesive systems. RESULTS: The mean SBS of the brackets bonded using the RelyX Unicem was 3.7 +/- 2.1 MPa and was significantly lower (t = 2.07, P = .048) than the SBS of the brackets bonded with the Transbond system (x = 5.97 +/- 4.2 MPa). The comparisons of the ARI scores between the two groups (chi(2) = 17.4) indicated that bracket failure mode was significantly different (P = .002) with more adhesive remaining on the teeth bonded with Transbond XT. CONCLUSIONS: The SBS of the self-adhesive universal cement needs to be increased for it to be successfully used for bonding orthodontic brackets.     

Are the flowable composites suitable for orthodontic bracket bonding?

The study aims to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) values of different flowable composites (Pulpdent Flows-Rite, 3M Filtek Flow, and Heraeus Kulzer Flow Line) in comparison with a conventional orthodontic adhesive and the bond failure sites of these composites. Eighty extracted human premolars were divided into four groups of 20 teeth each. Brackets were bonded to the teeth in each test group with different composites, according to the manufacturer's instructions. SBS values of these brackets were recorded (in MPa) using a universal testing machine. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were determined after the failure of brackets. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey honestly significant difference, and chi-square tests. SBS values of groups 1 (Transbond XT), 2 (Flows-Rite), 3 (Flow), and 4 (Flow Line) were found to be 17.10 +/- 2.48 MPa, 6.60 +/- 3.2 MPa, 7.75 +/- 2.9 MPa, and 8.53 +/- 3.50 MPa, respectively. The results of this study demonstrate that the orthodontic adhesive (Transbond XT) had higher SBS values than the flowable composites. Results of ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences among the groups (P < .05). The SBS values were significantly lower in all flowable composite groups than the orthodontic adhesive. ARI scores were significantly different between the orthodontic adhesive and all the flowable groups investigated. The use of flowable composites is not advocated for orthodontic bracket bonding because of significantly lower SBS values achieved.     

A self-conditioner for resin-modified glass ionomers in bonding orthodontic brackets

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new self-etch conditioner used with resin-modified glass ionomers (RMGIs) in bonding orthodontic brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty human molars were cleaned, mounted, and randomly divided into three groups. In group 1 (control), 20 orthodontic brackets were bonded to teeth using Transbond Plus Self-etching Primer; in group 2, 20 brackets were bonded using an RMGI with a 10% polyacrylic acid conditioner. In group 3, 20 brackets were bonded using Fuji Ortho LC with a new no-rinse self-conditioner for RMGIs. The same bracket type was used on all groups. The teeth were debonded in shear mode using a universal testing machine, and the amount of residual adhesive remaining on each tooth was evaluated. Analysis of variance was used to compare the shear bond strength (SBS), and the chi(2) test was used to compare the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the SBS (P = .556) between the groups. The mean SBS for Transbond Plus was 8.6 +/- 2.6 MPa, for Fuji Ortho LC using 10% polyacrylic acid 9.1 +/- 4.6 MPa, and for Fuji Ortho LC using GC Self-conditioner 9.9 +/- 4.1 MPa. The comparisons of the ARI scores between the three groups (chi(2) = 35.5) indicated that bracket failure mode was significantly different (P < .001), with more adhesive remaining on the teeth bonded using Transbond. Conclusions: The new self-etch conditioner can be used with an RMGI to successfully bond brackets. In addition, brackets bonded with Fuji Ortho LC resulted in less residual adhesive remaining on the teeth.     

Bonding with self-etching primers--pumice or pre-etch? An in vitro study

The purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strengths (SBSs) of orthodontic brackets bonded with self-etching primer (SEP) using different enamel surface preparations. A two-by-two factorial study design was used. Sixty human premolars were harvested, cleaned, and randomly assigned to four groups (n = 15 per group). Teeth were bathed in saliva for 48 hours to form a pellicle. Treatments were assigned as follows: group 1 was pumiced for 10 seconds and pre-etched for 5 seconds with 37 per cent phosphoric acid before bonding with SEP (Transbond Plus). Group 2 was pumiced for 10 seconds before bonding. Group 3 was pre-etched for 5 seconds before bonding. Group 4 had no mechanical or chemical preparation before bonding. All teeth were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37°C before debonding. The SBS values and adhesive remnant index (ARI) score were recorded. The SBS values (± 1 SD) for groups 1-4 were 22.9 ± 6.6, 16.1 ± 7.3, 36.2 ± 8.2, and 13.1 ± 10.1 MPa, respectively. Two-way analysis of variance and subsequent contrasts showed statistically significant differences among treatment groups. ARI scores indicated the majority of adhesive remained on the bracket for all four groups. Pre-etching the bonding surface for 5 seconds with 37 per cent phosphoric acid, instead of pumicing, when using SEPs to bond orthodontic brackets, resulted in greater SBSs.     

Influence of self-etchant application time on bracket shear bond strength

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of self-etching primer (SEP) application time on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human molars were cleaned, mounted, and randomly divided into two groups. The same SEP, adhesive, and brackets were used in both groups. Twenty teeth were conditioned following the manufacturers' recommendations by rubbing the SEP on the enamel surface for 3 to 5 seconds. The remaining 20 teeth were conditioned using the same SEP, but the application time was increased to 15 seconds. The teeth were debonded within half an hour following initial bonding using a universal testing machine. After debonding, the amount of residual adhesive remaining on the tooth was determined. Student's t-test was used to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of the two groups, and the chi2 test was used to compare the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores for the two adhesive systems. RESULTS: The mean SBS of the brackets bonded to the teeth subjected to the SEP for 3 to 5 seconds was 8.0+/-4.6 MPa and was not significantly different (t=-0.69, P=.494) from the SBS of the brackets bonded using a 15-second SEP application time (x=8.9+/-3.4 MPa). The comparisons of the ARI scores between the two groups (chi2=2.16) indicated that bracket failure mode was not significantly different (P=.340) for both groups, and most failures were at the bracket-adhesive interface. CONCLUSION: The present findings indicate that increasing the SEP application from 3 to 5 seconds to 15 seconds does not result in a significant increase in SBS.     

Effect of light-emitting diode on bond strength of orthodontic brackets

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of light-emitting diode (LED) light curing on shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to teeth. Light exposure of 40 seconds from a conventional halogen-based light-curing unit was used as a control. Eighty human premolars were divided into four groups of 20 each. Brackets were bonded to acid-etched teeth with Transbond XT light-cured adhesive. In the first group, the adhesive was light cured for 40 seconds with a conventional halogen unit (XL3000, 3M). In the other three groups, adhesive was cured with a commercial LED unit (Elipar FreeLight, 3M ESPE) for 10, 20, or 40 seconds. SBS of brackets was measured on a universal testing machine and recorded in megapascals. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were determined after failure of brackets. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and chi-square tests. No statistically significant differences were found among the SBS values of halogen-based light-cured (13.1 +/- 3.1 MPa) and 20- and 40-second LED-cured (13.9 +/- 4.8 MPa and 12.7 +/- 5.1 MPa) specimens (P > .05). However, 10 seconds of LED curing yielded significantly lower SBS (P < .05). No statistically significant differences were found between the ARI scores among groups. The results of this study are promising for the orthodontic application of LED-curing units, but further compatibility and physical characteristic studies of various orthodontic adhesives and clinical trials should be performed before validation.     

Effect of enamel protective agents on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

Background

This paper aimed to study the effect of two enamel protective agents on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded with conventional and self-etching primer (SEP) adhesive systems.

Methods

The two protective agents used were resin infiltrate (ICON) and Clinpro; the two adhesive systems used were self-etching primer system (Transbond Plus Self Etching Primer + Transbond XT adhesive) and a conventional adhesive system (37% phosphoric acid etch + Transbond XT primer + Transbond XT adhesive ). Sixty premolars divided into three major groups and six subgroups were included. The shear bond strength was tested 72 h after bracket bonding. Adhesive remnant index scores (ARI) were assessed. Statistical analysis consisted of a one-way ANOVA for the SBS and Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Mann-Whitney test for the ARI scores.

Results

In the control group, the mean SBS when using the conventional adhesive was 21.1 ± 7.5 MPa while when using SEP was 20.2 ± 4.0 MPa. When ICON was used with the conventional adhesive system, the SBS was 20.2 ± 5.6 MPa while with SEP was 17.6 ± 4.1 MPa. When Clinpro was used with the conventional adhesive system, the SBS was 24.3 ± 7.6 MPa while with SEP was 11.2 ± 3.5 MPa. Significant differences in the shear bond strength of the different groups (P = .000) was found as well as in the ARI scores distribution (P = .000).

Conclusion

The type of the adhesive system used to bond the orthodontic brackets, either conventional or self-etching primer, influenced the SBS, while the enamel protective material influenced the adhesive remnant on the enamel surface after debonding.     

An in vitro comparison of the shear bond strength of a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and a composite adhesive for bonding orthodontic brackets

The shear bond strength (SBS) of a light-cured, resin-reinforced glass ionomer and a composite adhesive in combination with a self-etching primer was compared after different setting times to evaluate when orthodontic wires could be placed. Additionally, the fracture site after debonding was assessed using the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). Eighty freshly extracted human premolars were used. Twenty teeth were randomly assigned to each of four groups: (1) brackets bonded with Transbond XT with a Transbond Plus etching primer and debonded within 5 minutes; (2) brackets bonded with Fuji Ortho LC and debonded within 5 minutes; (3) brackets bonded as for group 1 and debonded within 15 minutes; (4) brackets bonded as for group 2 and debonded within 15 minutes. The SBS of each sample was determined with an Instron machine. The mean SBS were, respectively: (1) 8.8 +/- 2 MPa; (2) 6.6 +/- 2.5 MPa; (3) 11 +/- 1.6 MPa and (4) 9.6 +/- 1.6 MPa. Interpolating the cumulative fracture probability by means of a Weibull analysis, the 10 per cent probabilities of fracture for the groups were found to be attained for shear stresses of 6.1, 3.1, 8.3 and 7.1 MPa, respectively. Chi-square testing of the ARI scores revealed that the nature of the remnant did not vary significantly with time, but the type of bonding material could generally be distinguished in leaving more or less than 10 per cent of bonding material on the tooth. After debonding, the Transbond system was likely to leave adhesive on at least 10 per cent of the bonded area of the tooth. The present findings indicate that brackets bonded with either Transbond XT in combination with Transbond Plus etching primer and Fuji Ortho LC had adequate bond strength at 5 minutes and were even stronger 15 minutes after initial bonding.     

The effect of variation in mesh-base design on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

This study compared the shear bond strengths of two metallic orthodontic brackets, one with a single-mesh bracket base and the other with a double-mesh bracket base. The Transbond XT adhesive system was used to bond all brackets to the teeth. Two types of brackets were compared, ie, 20 Ovation metal bracket series, with a double-mesh base (Super-mesh) and an 81.50 gauge (0.126 inch), and 20 Victory series metal brackets that have a miniature single-mesh base. The teeth were bonded and debonded within half an hour from the initial bonding. The enamel surface was examined under 10x magnification to determine how much residual adhesive remained on the tooth. Student's t-test was used to compare the shear bond strength of the two groups. Chi-square test was used to compare the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores for the two bracket types. The mean shear bond strength for the double-mesh brackets was 5.2 +/- 3.9 MPa and for the single-mesh brackets was 5.8 +/- 2.8 MPa. The t-test comparisons indicated that they were not significantly different from each other (P = .157). The ARI comparisons indicated that both bracket types had similar bracket failure modes and were not significantly different from each other (chi2 = 2.0, P = .5). These results indicated that single- and double-mesh bracket bases have comparable shear bond strength and bracket failure modes.     

Shear bond strength comparison between two orthodontic adhesives and self-ligating and conventional brackets

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the shear bond strengths of two adhesives using two types of brackets: a conventional and a self-ligating bracket system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty extracted human premolars were collected. The premolars were randomly divided into three groups of 20 teeth. All three groups were direct bonded. Groups 1 and 2 used light-cured adhesive and primer (Transbond XT) with a conventional (Orthos) and a self-ligating bracket (Damon 2), respectively. Group 3 used a light-cured primer (Orthosolo) and a light-cured adhesive (Blūgloo) with a self-ligating bracket (Damon 2). The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 40 +/- 2 hours, after which they were debonded and inspected for Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scoring. RESULTS: The mean shear bond strength was 15.2 MPa for group 1, 23.2 MPa for group 2, and 24.8 MPa for group 3. A one-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey test showed significant differences in bond strength (P < .001) between group 1 and groups 2 and 3 but no significant difference (P > .05) between groups 2 and 3. A Weibull analysis demonstrated that all three groups provided sufficient bond strength with over 90% survival rate at normal masticatory and orthodontic force levels. A Kruskal-Wallis test showed no significant difference (P > .05) in ARI scores among all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: All three groups demonstrated clinically acceptable bond strength. The Damon 2 self-ligating bracket exhibited satisfactory in vitro bond strength with both adhesive systems used.     

Bond strength of disinfected metal and ceramic brackets: an in vitro study

The aim of this in vitro investigation was to test whether disinfecting with Chlorhexamed fluid had an influence on the shear bond strength of metal and ceramic orthodontic brackets. Metal and ceramic brackets were fixed by the composite adhesives Transbond XT (light curing) and Concise (chemical curing) to 224 bovine permanent mandibular incisors. Bovine teeth were divided into eight groups of 28 each as group 1: metal bracket/Transbond XT, group 2: disinfected metal bracket/Transbond XT, group 3: metal bracket/Concise, group 4: disinfected metal bracket/Concise, group 5: ceramic bracket/Transbond XT, group 6: disinfected ceramic bracket/Transbond XT, group 7: ceramic bracket/Concise, and group 8: disinfected ceramic bracket/Concise. Adhesive bonding was done according to the manufacturers' instructions. As shown by group comparison (Kruskal-Wallis test, univariate analysis of variance, P < .001), the disinfection of metal brackets had no statistically relevant influence on shear bond strength (P = .454). However, disinfecting ceramic brackets with either adhesive led to a significant reduction in shear bond strength compared with the untreated ceramic bracket group (P < .001). The Fisher's exact test of the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores showed a significant difference within the metal group bonded with different adhesives (P = .0003). The ARI scores 1 and 2 were not reached by the ceramic bracket groups. The disinfection of the ceramic brackets is a suitable procedure for clinical use because the measured shear bond strength values were higher than 6-8 MPa required in orthodontics.     

Clinical acceptability of two self-etch adhesive resins for the bonding of orthodontic brackets to enamel

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether two self-adhesive resin cements, Clearfil SA and RelyX, can be used to successfully bond orthodontic brackets to enamel.

Materials and methods: Seventy extracted premolars were custom mounted, cleaned and randomly divided into three groups. In group 1 (control), orthodontic brackets were bonded to 25 premolars using the Transbond Plus and Transbond XT two step adhesive systerm adhesive. In group 2, brackets were bonded to 25 premolars using Clearfil SA. In group 3, brackets were bonded to 20 premolars using RelyX. The brackets were debonded using a universal testing machine and shear bond strengths recorded. After debonding, each tooth was examined under 20× magnification to evaluate the residual adhesive remaining. An ANOVA with Duncan’s Multiple Range Test was used to determine whether there were significant differences in shear bond strength between the groups. A Kruskal–Wallis Test and a Bonferroni multiple comparison procedure were used to compare the bond failure modes (adhesive remnant index scores) between the groups.

Results: The mean shear bond strengths for the brackets bonded using Clearfil SA and RelyX were 5·930±1·840 and 3·334±1·953 MPa, respectively. Both were significantly lower than that for the brackets bonded using Transbond (7·875±3·611 MPa). Both self-etch adhesive resin cement groups showed a greater incidence of bracket failure at the enamel/adhesive interface while the Transbond group showed a higher incidence at the bracket/adhesive interface.

Conclusions: The shear bond strengths of the self-etch adhesive resin cements may be inadequate to successfully bond orthodontic brackets to enamel.     

Effects of a torsion load on the shear bond strength with different bonding techniques

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that a torsional load applied after bracket bonding does not affect the shear bond strength (SBS) with different bonding techniques. Sixty human premolars were divided into two groups (experimental and control) to investigate the effects of a torsion load, and the two groups were further subdivided into three groups of 10 for the evaluation of different adhesive systems (one etch-and-rinse adhesive, Transbond XT; two self-etching primer adhesives, Transbond Plus and Beauty Ortho Bond). A torsion load (1.45 N/cm) was applied by beta-titanium wire at 15 minutes after bracket bonding in the experimental groups. All specimens were then thermocycled between 5 and 55°C for approximately 1 week (6000 cycles). The SBS for each sample was examined with a universal testing machine and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) score was calculated. Data were compared by two-way analysis of variance, Student's t-test, and a chi-square test. The SBS for Transbond XT after thermocycling with a torsion load was significantly lower than that without a torsion load. For Transbond Plus and Beauty Ortho Bond, there was no significant difference in the mean SBS between specimens thermocycled with and without a torsion load. No significant difference in the distribution of frequencies among the ARI categories was observed among the six groups, although the ARI scores for specimens with a torsion load tended to be higher than those without a torsion load. In conclusion, the SBS of the conventional etch-and-rinse adhesive system significantly decreased under a torsion load with thermocycling.     

Effect of using a new cyanoacrylate adhesive on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets.

During bonding of orthodontic brackets to enamel, conventional adhesive systems use three different agents: an enamel conditioner, a primer solution, and an adhesive resin. A unique characteristic of some new bonding systems is that they need neither a priming agent nor a curing light to bond brackets. Such an approach should be more cost-effective for the clinician and indirectly also for the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of using a cyanoacrylate adhesive on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets and on the bracket/adhesive failure mode. The brackets were bonded to extracted human teeth according to one of two protocols. Group 1: Teeth were etched with 37% phosphoric acid. After applying the primer, the brackets were bonded with Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and were light-cured for 20 seconds. Group 2: Teeth were etched with 35% phosphoric acid. The brackets were then bonded with Smartbond (Gestenco International, G?thenburg, Sweden). The present in vitro findings indicated that the use of the cyanoacrylate adhesive to bond orthodontic brackets to the enamel surface did not result in a significantly different (P = .24) shear bond force (mean = 5.8 +/- 2.4 MPa) as compared to the control group (mean = 5.2 +/- 2.9 MPa). The comparison of the Adhesive Remnant Index scores indicated that there was significantly (P = .006) less residual adhesive remaining on the tooth with the cyanoacrylate than on the tooth with the conventional adhesive system. In conclusion, the new adhesive has the potential to be used to bond orthodontic brackets while reducing the total bonding time.     

Effect of self-etching primers on bond strength--are they reliable?

Currently introduced self-etching primers combine conditioning and priming agents into a single product. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of using three self-etching primers on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets and on the bracket/adhesive failure mode. Brackets were bonded to extracted human teeth according to one of four protocols. In the control group, teeth were etched with 37% phosphoric acid. In the experimental groups, the enamel was conditioned with three different self-etching primers, Clearfil SE Bond (CSE), Etch & Prime 3.0 (EP3), or Transbond Plus (TBP), as suggested by the manufacturer. The brackets were then bonded with Transbond XT in all groups. The present in vitro findings indicate that conditioning with TBP before bonding orthodontic brackets to the enamel surface resulted in a significantly (P < or = .001) higher SBS (mean, 16.0 +/- 4.5 MPa) than that found in CSE, EP3, and the control (acid-etched [AE]) groups. CSE produced bond strength values (mean 11.5 +/- 3.3 MPa) that are statistically comparable to those produced by acid etching (mean 13.1 +/- 3.1 MPa). The use of EP3 for enamel conditioning resulted in the lowest mean SBS value (mean 9.9 +/- 4.0 MPa). A comparison of the adhesive remnant index scores indicated that there was more residual adhesive remaining on the teeth that were treated with conventional acid etching than in the CSE and EP3 groups. In the TBP group, the failure sites were similar to those of the AE group but different from those of the CSE group.     

Improvement of the orthodontic bracket bond strength with pre-heated composite restoratives

Abstract

Aim. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of pre-heated composite restoratives on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets. Methods. The following materials were tested: a microhybrid composite restorative (Filtek Z250), two nanofilled composite restoratives (Filtek Z350 and NT Premium), a nanohybrid composite restorative (Brilliant) and a conventional orthodontic adhesive (Transbond XT). All materials were stored for 1 h in the incubator either at 25°C (room temperature simulation) or 60°C before bonding 100 orthodontic brackets on bovine lower incisors (n = 10). One Coat Bond SL and Transbond XT were used to bond the composite restoratives and the Transbond XT adhesive paste, respectively. After storage in distilled water for 24 h, the brackets were subjected to SBS test at a speed of 0.5 mm/min until bracket debonding. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was assigned to the fractured specimens. Data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA and the Tukey post-hoc test (p < 0.05). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare ARI scores between the groups (p < 0.05). Results. There was no statistically significant difference between the materials at room temperature. Samples bonded with pre-heated materials showed a statistically higher SBS than those bonded with room temperature materials. Samples bonded with the pre-heated orthodontic adhesive showed the highest SBS among all the pre-heated materials. All preheated composite restoratives produced an SBS mean higher than that of Transbond XT stored at room temperature. Conclusion. The use of pre-heated composite restoratives and orthodontic adhesives might be an alternative approach to bond orthodontic brackets.     

Shear bond strength after multiple bracket bonding with or without repeated etching

The purpose of the study was to measure the in vitro shear bond strength (SBS) of metal brackets after multiple bonding and debonding with and without repeated etching. One hundred and twenty extracted premolars were divided into three equal groups. In group 1, the brackets were bonded and debonded three times with repeated enamel etching and in groups 2 and 3 without repeated etching. In group 2, all composite remnants were removed before bonding, while in group 3, the remnants were levelled. Analysis of variance was used to determine significant differences in SBS with Bonferroni adjustment for the multiple testing procedures. The results showed that in group 1, the mean SBS was 11.69 MPa (SD 2.65) at the first, 14.30 MPa (SD 2.69) at the second, and 12.19 MPa (SD 2.26) at the third debonding. In group 2, SBS decreased from 12.57 MPa (SD 2.54) to below 8.0 MPa. In group 3, SBS remained constant from the first (11.93 MPa; SD 2.14) to the second (12.06 MPa; SD 1.65) debonding and only decreased significantly to 9.74 MPa (SD 1.80) at the third debonding. Less composite remained on the teeth after each debonding sequence. This was characterized by a shift from adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores 2 and 3 after the first debonding to ARI scores 1 and 2 after the second debonding to predominantly scores 0 and 1 after the third debonding. After bracket loss and levelling of composite remnants, the SBS is sufficient for application of orthodontic forces. Repeated etching may involve a higher risk of enamel tear-outs during debonding.     

Shear bond strength comparison between direct and indirect bonded orthodontic brackets.

The purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to teeth with either an indirect bonding technique and a new adhesive resin or a direct bonding technique and a light-activated adhesive. Fifty-four extracted premolars were mounted in acrylic blocks and randomly divided into 2 groups (n = 27). In one group, orthodontic brackets were bonded to premolars with an indirect bonding adhesive system; in the other, brackets were bonded with the direct method. Seventy-two hours later, the brackets were placed in a testing machine and subjected to a shear force with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mean shear bond strengths for the indirect and direct groups were 11.2 and 10.9 MPa, respectively, both exceeding the minimum shear bond strength range of 5.9 to 7.8 MPa often cited in the literature for clinical success. Data were analyzed with Student t tests. No significant difference in shear bond strength between the 2 groups was detected (P =.76). Resin remnants on orthodontic bracket pads were observed with a dissecting microscope at 30x magnification and scored with a modified adhesive remnant index. There was no significant difference between groups (P >.05). There was also no correlation between shear bond strength and the percentage of adhesive resin remnants left on the orthodontic bracket. Under the conditions of this study, no evidence suggests a difference in shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to tooth enamel, whether they are bonded with the direct or indirect technique.     

Shear bond strength comparison of two adhesive systems following thermocycling. A new self-etch primer and a resin-modified glass ionomer

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of a standardized thermocycling protocol on the shear bond strength (SBS) of two adhesive systems: a resin-modified glass ionomer and a composite resin used with a new self-etching primer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty human molars were cleaned, mounted, and randomly divided into two groups. In group 1, brackets were bonded to the teeth using Fuji Ortho LC adhesive, and in group 2, the Transbond Plus system was used. The teeth were stored in water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, thermocycled between 5 and 55 degrees C, and debonded using a universal testing machine. The enamel surface was examined under 10x magnification to determine the amount of residual adhesive remaining on the tooth. Student's t-test was used to compare the SBS and the chi-square test was used to compare the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores. RESULTS: The mean SBS for the brackets bonded using the Fuji Ortho LC was 6.4 +/- 4.5 MPa, and the mean SBS for the Transbond Plus system was 6.1 +/- 3.2 MPa. The result of the t-test comparisons (t = 0.207) indicated that there was no significant difference (P = .837) between the two groups. The comparisons of the ARI scores (chi(2) = 0.195) indicated that bracket failure mode was not significantly different (P = .907) between the two adhesives. CONCLUSION: Although SBS and ARI scores were not significantly different for the two adhesives, clinicians need to take into consideration the other properties of the adhesives before using them.     

The effects of primer precuring on the shear bond strength between gold alloy surfaces and metal brackets

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of precuring of primer coated on bracket bases on the strength of bonds between metal brackets and gold alloy. Square type III gold alloy plates were sandblasted with 30 μm silicon dioxide. After silica coating, excessive particles were removed gently with air. Silane was then applied, and maxillary central incisor metal brackets were bonded to each conditioned alloy surface with Transbond XT. Half of the specimens were precured at the bracket base after primer coating and the other half was not precured before bonding to the alloy surface. After bracket positioning, samples were cured using a light emitting diode (LED) for 40 seconds. Shear bond strengths were tested and adhesive remnant index (ARI) was evaluated after 1 hour and 24 hours. The primer precuring and 24 hours group exhibited highest bond strength (12.53 MPa) and the no precuring and 1 hour group showed lowest bond strength (5.58 MPa). Precured groups showed lower ARI scores. Due to the shallow curing depth of LED light and inhibition of transillumination at the metal surface, primer precuring at the bracket base is required for secure bracket bonding on gold alloy surfaces using LED curing units.