渗透性树脂治疗早期釉质龋后对托槽抗剪切粘接强度的影响

目的研究渗透性树脂治疗早期釉质龋后,对正畸托槽抗剪切粘接强度的影响。方法选择30颗新鲜拔除的健康人类前磨牙,随机分为对照组、脱矿组、渗透性树脂治疗组,每组10颗。使用光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子将托槽粘接于实验牙后,采用万能力学试验机测量托槽的抗剪切粘接强度(SBS),并对牙面进行粘接剂残留指数(ARI)评估。结果 SBS对照组为5.13±0.62MPa,脱矿组为4.09±0.89 MPa,渗透性树脂治疗组为6.23±1.17 MPa。任意两组之间独立样本t检验均表明差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。脱矿组ARI小于另外两组,对照组和渗透性树脂治疗组之间ARI无统计学差异。结论渗透性树脂治疗早期釉质龋不影响托槽的粘接强度。     

用于正畸托槽粘接的玻璃离子粘固剂的抗剪切强度

目的　研究用于正畸托槽粘接的树脂改良型玻璃离子粘固剂的抗剪切强度。方法　 30颗离体前磨牙平均分为 2组。一组用树脂改良型玻璃离子粘固剂 (Advance)粘接方丝弓正畸托槽 ,另一组用复合树脂釉质粘接剂 (DM)粘接。 2 4h后用材料力学试验机检测两种材料的抗剪切强度 ,统计牙面上粘接材料的残留指数。结果　 2种粘接材料的抗剪切强度相似 [玻璃离子粘固剂为 (6 86 2±2 142 )MPa,复合树脂粘接剂为 (7 183± 3 2 0 5 )Mpa],差异无显著性。结论　体外研究中 ,树脂改良型玻璃离子粘固剂的抗剪切强度已达到复合树脂釉质粘接剂的水平 ,具有临床应用前景     

两种托槽粘接剂的比较实验和研究

目的：测定树脂和化学固化型玻璃离子托槽粘接剂的抗剪切粘接强度。方法：100颗离体双尖牙被随机分成两组，每组又按照测试时间的不同分成3个亚组。组1、组2分别用京津釉质粘合剂(树脂)、Ketac—Bond(化学固化型玻璃离子粘接结剂)粘接托槽，对所有实验样本进行了抗剪切粘接强度的测试。结果：①树脂和化学固化型玻璃离子的抗剪切粘接强度随时间的增加而增强。②树脂粘接剂的断裂主要发生在釉质—树脂界面，而化学固化型玻璃离子粘接剂的断裂则主要发生在自身内部。结论：树脂型托槽粘接剂固化后24h以内达到临床应用标准，而化学固化型玻璃离子粘接剂在固化后24h以内达不到该标准，不适合于临床应用。     

树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂与自酸蚀封闭剂联合用于托槽粘接的实验研究

目的:对树脂加强型玻璃离子与自酸蚀粘接剂联合用于托槽粘接的性能进行实验室评价.方法:选择因正畸需要而拔除的健康双尖牙,研究在干燥、水湿润及唾液污染情况下,将树脂加强型玻璃离子与自酸蚀粘接剂联合应用于粘贴正畸托槽时的剪切强度,以及托槽去除后牙面残留粘接剂指数.结果:将树脂加强型玻璃离子与自酸蚀粘接剂联合应用于粘贴正畸托槽,在干燥、水湿润及唾液污染情况下能满足临床所需要的剪切强度.结论:自酸蚀封闭剂和树脂加强型玻璃离子所构成的粘接技术粘接正畸托槽,虽然不如传统的复合树脂粘接强度高,但已能满足临床所需要的剪切强度,尤其对那些隔湿条件差、易受污染的粘接环境来说无疑是一种理想的选择,在临床上有广阔的应用前景.     

树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀抗拉伸粘接性能的研究

目的 研究树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀(RMGIC)在不同牙面处理条件下,其抗拉伸粘接强度随时间变化的情况,为临床更有效地应用树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀粘接托槽提供参考.方法 取因正畸原因拔除的人前磨牙150颗,随机分为5组,树脂对照组,GC酸蚀+水润湿组,GC酸蚀+干燥组,GC不酸蚀+水润湿组,GC不酸蚀+干燥组.分别采用不同方式粘接托槽.检测其在粘接后30min、24h、30d的抗拉伸粘接强度及粘接剂残留指数.结果 除GC酸蚀+干燥组在粘接后30min外,两GC酸蚀组的抗拉伸粘接强度均高于同一时间任一GC不酸蚀组(P＜0.01).各实验组在粘接后30d时的抗拉伸粘接强度均高于相同条件下30min时的抗拉伸粘接强度(P＜0.01).GC酸蚀组粘接剂残留指数(ARI)与对照组相当(P＞0.05),而GC不酸蚀组ARI低于对照组(P＜0.01).结论 酸蚀处理有助于提升树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀GC的抗拉伸粘接强度,其强度基本可以达到传统树脂类粘接剂水平.湿润的粘接环境较干燥的粘接环境更有助于加快RMGIC抗拉伸粘接强度的上升.     

3种粘接材料与氧化锆陶瓷粘接抗剪切强度的比较

目的研究3种粘接材料与氧化锆陶瓷材料的初期及耐久粘接抗剪切强度。方法将预烧结氧化锆陶瓷片试件喷砂后分为3组,每组20个,分别采用玻璃离子水门汀(GIC组)、Panavia F 2.0树脂粘接剂(PF组)、Clearfil SA Luting树脂粘接剂(SAC组)与核树脂块粘接,每组随机选取10个试件进行冷热循环实验(10 000次,5～55℃),用计算机控制万能材料试验机测定其粘接抗剪切强度。结果未经冷热循环处理的GIC组、PF组、SAC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度值分别为(21.98±1.78)MPa、(30.26±1.73)MPa、(28.63±2.02)MPa,GIC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度低于其他两组(P<0.01),PF组与SAC组的试件相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);而冷热循环后,GIC组、PF组、SAC组试件的粘接抗剪切强度值分别为(10.72±2.03)MPa、(28.50±1.54)MPa、(27.02±1.79)MPa,GIC组试件经冷热循环后,其粘接抗剪切强度值明显下降(P<0.05),而其他两组试件经冷热循环后其粘接抗剪切强度值无明显改变(P>0.05)。结论使用玻璃离子可获得较好的初期粘接抗剪切强度,但耐久粘接强度欠佳;含磷酸酯单体的树脂粘接剂可使氧化锆陶瓷获得良好的初期粘接抗剪切强度及耐久粘接抗剪切强度;自粘接型树脂粘接剂操作简便,粘接抗剪切强度与自酸蚀型树脂粘接剂相当,且粘接效果持久。     

树脂加强型玻璃离子黏结剂黏结力的实验研究

目的 了解光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀的剪切强度能否满足临床需要;并比较不同条件下其剪切强度的变化.方法 收集离体前磨牙50颗,随机均分为5组.第1组(对照组):35%磷酸酸蚀30s,冲洗、干燥,涂黏结剂,采用京津釉质黏结剂黏结托槽.第2、4组:35%磷酸酸蚀30s,冲洗,湿润,采用光固化型的Fuji Ortho Lc树脂加强型玻璃离子黏结托槽.第3、5组:不酸蚀,采用光固化型的Fuji Ortho Lc树脂加强型玻璃离子黏结托槽.1、2、3组用电子万能实验机测24h的抗剪切强度,4、5组测30 min的抗剪切强度.并统计牙面上的黏结剂残留量.结果 第2、3、4组的抗剪切强度均能满足临床需要,第5组的抗剪切强度不能满足临床需要,第2组的抗剪切强度与其它各组相比差别有显著性.结论 光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子在酸蚀和免酸蚀后24h,以及酸蚀黏结30min后的剪切强度均能满足临床需要;而免酸蚀黏结30min的抗剪切强度不能满足临床需要;酸蚀后光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子的剪切强度明显增强.     

树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂粘结强度的研究

目的 检测树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂的粘结强度,探讨影响粘结性能的相关因素.方法 30颗健康离体前磨牙分成两组,分别用京津釉质粘合剂和树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂初次、二次粘接托槽,测剪切强度及粘结剂残余指数.结果 树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固荆的粘结强度与临床普遍使用的京津釉质粘合剂的粘结强度相近,差异无显著性(P>O.05).结论 树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂可以替代复合树脂粘结剂.能够满足临床需要.     

甲基丙烯酰氧乙基磷酸胆碱对自酸蚀粘接剂托槽剪切粘接强度的影响

目的 评价甲基丙烯酰氧乙基磷酸胆碱(MPC)对自酸蚀粘接剂托槽粘接强度的影响,为研发具有抗蛋白附着性能的自酸蚀粘接剂奠定基础.方法 将MPC按照质量分数0%、3%、5%、7.5%和10%的比例添加到商品化的自酸蚀粘接剂(3M,Adper Easy One)中制作改性自酸蚀粘接剂.收集因正畸减数拔除的健康前磨牙180颗,分为6组,每组30颗.实验组用MPC改性自酸蚀粘接剂酸蚀,标记为A0,A3,A5,A7.5,A10,对照组用37%磷酸酸蚀.将上述各组分别用树脂改良型玻璃离子粘接剂粘接托槽,分别测试即刻、模拟口腔环境30天和180天后的托槽粘接强度.结果 实验组A0,A3,A5,A7.5,A10与对照组即刻、模拟口腔环境30天和180天后的粘接强度相比均无统计学差异(P>0.05).实验组A10在3个时间点的粘接强度为(5.20 ± 0.9)MPa,(4.62 ± 0.7)MPa和(4.19 ± 0.7)MPa)低于临床使用标准,与对照组以及其他实验组的粘接强度相比显著下降(P<0.0001).结论 将3% ~7.5% MPC添加到商品化自酸蚀粘接剂中不影响托槽粘接强度,且长期稳定性良好,为进一步研发具有抗蛋白附着性能的自酸蚀粘接剂奠定基础.     

光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀即刻剪切强度的测定

目的研究光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀黏结正畸托槽的即刻剪切强度。方法收集离体前磨牙30颗,随机均分为3组。第1组(对照组):35%磷酸酸蚀30 s,冲洗、干燥,涂黏结剂,京津釉质黏结剂黏结托槽。第2、3组:35%磷酸酸蚀30 s,冲洗,湿润,光固化型的Fuji Ortho Lc树脂加强型玻璃离子黏结托槽。第1、2组24 h后测剪切强度,第3组30 min内测剪切强度。托槽去除后统计牙面上的黏结剂残留量。结果第2组的剪切强度高于第3组,差异有显著性;第1、3组间剪切强度差异无显著性。结论光固化树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀的即刻黏结强度能够满足临床要求,但24 h后的黏结强度显著增强。     

树脂修饰化玻璃离子托槽粘结剂粘结强度的体外研究

目的：评估一种树脂修饰化的玻璃离子托槽粘结剂在牙面不同处理方式和环境下的两次粘结后的剪切强度情况。方法：将新近拔除的105颗上颌第一前磨牙随机均分成7组,按照说明书的要求完成托槽的粘结。对照组牙面用37%的磷酸处理后,用光固化复合树脂粘结剂（3M,Transbond XT）粘结。其它6组牙面分别在37%的磷酸、GC处理剂（GC Self-Conditioner）、和不做任何处理的条件下,分别在干燥和湿润的环境下用树脂修饰化的玻璃离子（RMGIC;Fuji ORTHO LC,GC Corporation,Tokyo,Japan）粘结,所有牙齿均选用同种托槽。托槽粘结24 h后,在万能测力机下以1 mm/min的速度卸载,并记录下数值。除去牙面和托槽底面多余粘结剂后,重复上述过程。每次卸载后检查牙釉质损坏情况。结果：对照组两次剪切强度有较小的差异,其它GC玻璃离子粘结剂组两次剪切强度没有统计学意义。GC粘结剂不做任何处理组在干燥和湿润的环境下其剪切强度存在明显的差异。干燥环境下,37%的磷酸和GC处理剂处理后,GC粘结剂组两次卸载后的牙釉质均出现不同程度的釉裂或釉质脱落。结论：这种树脂修饰化的玻璃离子粘结剂可以在多种条件下用于托槽的粘结。     

��̻�������֬���������в�ճ��ʵ���о�

目的探讨Esthet—X Flow光固化流体树脂粘接正畸托槽的效果。方法收集2012年1月至2012年2月在中国医科大学口腔医院颌面外科因正畸需要拔除的上颌第一前磨牙30颗,随机等分为3组：实验Ⅰ组应用Esthet—X Flow光固化流体树脂及Prime＆Bond NT粘接剂粘接托槽;实验Ⅱ组仅应用Esthet—X Flow光固化流体树脂粘接托槽;对照组应用京津釉质粘接剂粘接托槽。测试各组的抗剪切强度,并在光学显微镜下观察粘接剂残留情况。结果实验Ⅰ、Ⅱ组的抗剪切强度均明显低于对照组（P〈0．05）,而实验Ⅰ、Ⅱ组间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,且抗剪切强度均大于9MPa,达到了临床应用标准。各组间粘接剂残留指数差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论单独应用Esthet—X Flow光固化流体树脂可满足临床粘接托槽的要求。     

Effect of etching and light-curing time on the shear bond strength of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of etching and light-curing time on the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) upon debonding of orthodontic brackets. Sixty-eight bovine permanent incisors were obtained and embedded in acrylic resin. Edgewise metallic brackets were bonded to the teeth with Fuji Ortho LC RMGIC. The specimens were randomly assigned to 4 groups, using the following etching and light-curing times: G1: 10% polyacrylic acid and 40 s (control); G2: 37% phosphoric acid and 40 s; G3: 10% polyacrylic acid and 50 s; and G4: 37% phosphoric acid and 50 s. Shear test was performed at 0.5 mm/min and the ARI was assessed. G2 (3.6 ± 0.98 MPa) presented significantly higher (p<0.05) SBS than G1 (2.76 ± 0.86 MPa) and G4 (2.86 ± 0.68 MPa), and there was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) between G2 and G3 (2.94 ± 0.67 MPa). ARI presented prevalence of scores 2 and 3 in all groups. RMGIC SBS enhanced with 37% phosphoric acid etching and 40 s light-curing time, but this did not occur when the light-curing time was increased, regardless of the acid used. RMGIC presented prevalence of failures at the adhesive/bracket interface.     

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.     

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.     

一种新型自酸蚀剂对托槽粘结强度的影响

目的 :探讨一种新型自酸蚀剂对托槽粘结强度的影响。方法 :收集人离体前磨牙 10 5个 ,随机分成 7组。 1组 :3 5 %磷酸酸蚀 3 0s ,去离子水冲洗 ,吹干 ;涂粘结剂 ,TransbondXT光固化复合树脂粘贴托槽。 2组、3组和 4组分别在涂自酸蚀剂 3s内、2min和 15min后粘贴托槽。 5组涂自酸蚀剂后 ,再涂一层唾液粘贴托槽 ;6组依次涂唾液、自酸蚀剂后粘贴托槽 ;7组涂唾液、自酸蚀剂、唾液后粘贴托槽。所有试件均于常温去离子水内放置2 4h ,测试抗剪切强度 ,观察断面形态。结果 :4组的抗剪切强度最高。 5组和 7组的抗剪切强度显著低于其它组。断面形态观察 ,结果显示抗剪切强度高的组别在托槽与复合树脂之间发生断裂 ;抗剪切强度低的组别在牙齿与复合树脂之间发生断裂。结论 :该自酸蚀剂能获得与磷酸酸蚀相同的粘结强度 ,且发生断裂不受操作时间的影响 ,但在操作时间内应防止唾液污染。     

Etching conditions for resin-modified glass ionomer cement for orthodontic brackets.

This study reports the tensile bond strength of orthodontic eyelets (RMO, Inc, Denver, Colo) bonded to human extracted teeth with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Fuji Ortho LC, GC America, Alsip, Ill) and various acid etchants (Etch-37 and All-Etch, Bisco, Schaumburg, Ill; Ultra Etch, 3M Unitek, St Paul, Minn) for enamel preparation before bonding. The enamel etch conditions were as follows: 37% phosphoric acid with silica; 37% phosphoric acid, silica-free; 10% phosphoric acid, silica-free; 10% polyacrylic acid; and unetched enamel. Bond strength was measured by pulling in tension on the eyelet with a 0.018-in steel wire perpendicular to the enamel surface with a testing machine (Instron model 1125, Canton, Mass) at a speed of 2 mm/min. A light-cured resin cement (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) applied to enamel etched with 37% phosphoric acid containing silica served as a control. Each group included 30 specimens. The Weibull distribution (m) was used for statistical analysis with a 90% CI. The different etchants used with RMGIC did not affect tensile bond strength. The resin cement group had the highest tensile strength. Significantly lower bond strengths were observed when glass ionomer cement was used to bond orthodontic attachments to nonetched teeth. However, unlike resin cement, RMGIC can bond effectively to etched teeth in a moist environment without an additional bonding agent.     

Shear bond strength and residual adhesive after orthodontic bracket debonding

OBJECTIVE: To compare the shear bond strength and determine the area of residual adhesive on teeth after the debonding of brackets bonded with two types of orthodontic adhesives. These were a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC; Fuji ORTHO LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and a resin applied as a precoated bracket (APC bracket, 3M Unitek GmbH, Seefeld, Germany). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 premolar teeth were randomly divided into two groups, and brackets were bonded according to the manufacturers' instructions. In group 1, the teeth were conditioned using 10% polyacrylic acid, and the brackets were bonded using Fuji Ortho LC in wet condition. In group 2, the teeth were etched using 37% phosphoric acid, and the APC brackets were bonded. Bond strength was measured using a testing instrument (2000S, Lloyds Instruments, Fareham, England) at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, and the residual adhesive was quantified using a three-dimensional laser scanning instrument. RESULTS: The Mann-Whitney test showed that the median bond strength of group 1 was significantly lower than that of group 2 (P < .001). A Pearson chi-square test of the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) revealed a significant difference among the groups tested. All the adhesives in group 1 failed at the enamel/adhesive interface (100%), whereas group 2 exhibited cohesive failure of the adhesive (90%). CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength values obtained with the RMGIC were above the minimum values suggested in the literature to achieve a clinically effective adhesion in orthodontics.     

��ͬ���������մ��в����Ό����ǿ�ȱȽ�

目的    探讨不同处理方法对陶瓷托槽再黏结抗剪切强度的影响,为临床应用提供依据。方法    选取2009年2—7月厦门市口腔医院正畸科患者中因正畸需要而拔除的健康双尖牙70颗,随机抽取30颗用于制备脱落陶瓷托槽,其余40颗用于黏结实验。将40颗用于黏结实验的牙随机分成4组（每组10颗）：新陶瓷托槽组,烧灼处理组,喷砂处理组,硅涂层处理组。陶瓷托槽黏结于未经酸蚀处理的微湿的离体牙上,然后用去托槽钳小心取下,形成脱落托槽。分别对陶瓷托槽底面进行烧灼处理、喷砂处理、硅涂层处理;不同方法处理后,各组托槽底面常规涂硅烷偶联剂。每组离体牙经常规牙面处理后,分别黏结新陶瓷托槽及脱落后处理的陶瓷托槽,测定并比较各组抗剪切强度。结果    新陶瓷托槽、烧灼处理、喷砂处理、硅涂层处理组抗剪切强度依次为（12.4733±3.4326）MPa、（7.2375±1.6914 ）MPa、（9.1612±1.3261）MPa、（13.1671±5.0392）MPa;烧灼组和喷砂组抗剪切强度与新托槽组和硅涂层差别有统计学意义（P < 0.05）,硅涂层组与新托槽组之间的差别无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。结论    陶瓷托槽经烧灼处理及喷砂处理后再黏结其抗剪切强度均有下降,硅涂层处理后其抗剪切强度与新托槽相近。     

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.