The effect of modifying the self-etchant bonding protocol on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

OBJECTIVE: To compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets when the self-etching primer (SEP) and the bracket adhesive are light cured either separately or simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five human molars were randomly divided into five equal groups. Brackets precoated with Transbond XT composite adhesive were used. The five protocols were: Group 1 (control), the SEP Transbond Plus was applied, brackets placed, and adhesive light cured for 20 seconds; Group 2, SEP Adper Prompt L-Pop was applied, light cured, brackets placed, and light cured; Group 3, the same SEP as in Group 2 was used, however, the SEP and bracket adhesive were light cured together; Group 4, SEP Clearfil S3 Bond was applied, light cured, brackets placed, and light cured; and Group 5, the same SEP as in group 4 was used, however, the SEP and the adhesive were light cured together. The teeth were debonded using a universal testing machine, and the enamel was examined for residual adhesive. Analysis of variance was used to compare the SBS. RESULTS: The SBS of Clearfil S3 Bond after one light cure and two light cures were significantly greater than the bonds of brackets using Transbond Plus. Brackets bonded using Adper Prompt L-Pop after one light cure and two light cures were not significantly different from the other groups. The groups did not differ significantly in their bracket failure modes. CONCLUSION: Only one light curing application is needed to successfully bond brackets when using SEPs and adhesives. This approach can potentially reduce technique sensitivity as well as chair time.     

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.     

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.     

Effects of high-speed curing devices on shear bond strength and microleakage of orthodontic brackets.

This study evaluated the shear-peel bond strength and mode of bond failure of 3 curing devices (plasma arc light, argon laser, and conventional halogen light) and 2 orthodontic bracket adhesives with different filler contents (Transbond XT and Adhesive Precoated [APC]). Observations of microleakage were also reported. Ninety human adolescent premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups, and standardized brackets were bonded according to the manufacturers' recommendations. The plasma arc light produced significantly (P =.006) higher bond strength than did the halogen light or the argon laser when Transbond was used. When APC was used, the plasma arc light and the halogen light produced similar results, and they both produced significantly (P =.015) higher bond strengths than did the argon laser. Overall, the APC showed substantially less variation in bond strength than did the Transbond. Although all curing methods showed significant microleakage (P <.001), differences among the 3 curing lights occurred only when APC was used. Microscopic evaluations demonstrated that 95% of the specimens failed for adhesion at the bracket or tooth surface; the argon laser produced the highest adhesive remnant index scores. On the basis of bond strength and microleakage results, the plasma arc light was comparable with or superior to the other curing devices, depending on the adhesive used.     

两种光固化正畸粘接剂聚合度的比较

目的比较两种光固化正畸粘接剂Transbond XT和Fuji ortho LC在传统卤素灯（Halogen）不同光照时间作用下的聚合度。方法30颗上颌中切牙金属托槽分成6组（每组5颗）。用标准量的粘接剂将托槽粘接于牙齿表面,随机分配3组用Transbond XT粘接剂进行粘接,3组用Fuji ortho LC进行粘接。每一种粘接剂使用Halogen灯光照不同时间进行固化。每组通过傅里叶变换红外光谱仪记录红外吸收峰进行聚合度分析。实验结果通过方差分析（ANOVA）和t检验进行统计学分析。结果Fuji ortho LC在相同光照时间作用下的聚合度（88．28±4．08％）要大于Transbond XT（53．56±6．06％）,其差异具有统计学意义。光照时间的不同对粘接剂聚合度的影响无统计学意义。结论两种粘接剂的聚合度存在显著差异,而光照时间对粘接剂聚合度的影响没有差别。     

Effects of a fluoride-containing casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate complex on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of enamel pre-treatment with a new fluoride-containing casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) complex on the shear bond strength (SBS) of brackets bonded with etch-and-rinse or self-etching adhesive systems. The material comprised 66 extracted human premolars randomly divided into six equal groups with respect to the enamel pre-treatment and adhesive system employed: 1. No pre-treatment and brackets bonded with the etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Transbond XT). 2. Pre-treatment with fluoride-containing CPP-ACP paste (MI Paste Plus) and Transbond XT. 3. Pre-treatment with non-fluoride CPP-ACP paste (MI Paste) and Transbond XT.4. No pre-treatment and brackets bonded with the self-etching adhesive system (Transbond Plus). 5 and 6. Enamel pre-treated as for groups 2 and 3, respectively, and the Transbond Plus. Bonded specimens were subjected to thermal cycling (×1000) before SBS testing. The residual adhesive on the enamel surface was evaluated after debonding with the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Data evaluation was made using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test for SBS results, and Kruskal-Wallis test for ARI results. The results showed that enamel pre-treatment with either fluoride or non-fluoride CPP-ACP paste had no significant effect on the SBS of the self-etching adhesive system (P > 0.05). Enamel pre-treatment with non-fluoride CPP-ACP in group 3 significantly reduced the SBS of the etch-and-rinse adhesive (P < 0.001), while pre-treatment with fluoride-containing CPP-ACP paste (groups 2 and 5) did not affect debonding values (P > 0.05). The fluoride-containing CPP-ACP did not compromise the SBS of brackets bonded with the tested etch-and-rinse and self-etching systems, but its non-fluoride version significantly decreased the SBS of the etch-and-rinse adhesive system.     

Microleakage beneath ceramic and metal brackets photopolymerized with LED or conventional light curing units

OBJECTIVE: To test the null hypotheses that (1) the type of light curing unit used (quartz-tungsten-halogen [QTH] or light-emitting diode [LED]) would not affect the amount of microleakage observed beneath brackets, and (2) the bracket type used (ceramic or metal) would not influence the amount of microleakage observed beneath brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 40 freshly-extracted human premolars were randomly assigned into 4 bonding groups (n = 10/group): group 1, metal bracket + LED-cured Transbond XT; group 2, ceramic bracket + LED-cured Transbond XT; group 3, metal bracket + QTH-cured Transbond XT; and group 4, ceramic bracket + QTH-cured Transbond XT. The teeth were kept in distilled water for 1 month, and thereafter subjected to 500 thermal cycles. Then, specimens were sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours, sectioned, and photographed under a stereomicroscope. Microleakage was scored with regard to the adhesive-tooth interface and the bracket-adhesive interface at both incisal and gingival margins. Statistical analysis was accomplished by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Microleakage was observed in all groups. When an LED curing unit was used for adhesive polymerization, ceramic brackets displayed significantly less microleakage than metal brackets in both tooth-adhesive and bracket-adhesive interfaces. When a QTH curing unit was used, ceramic brackets displayed significantly less microleakage than metal brackets in the bracket-adhesive interface in both gingival and incisal margins. CONCLUSIONS: Ceramic brackets cured with LED units were the best combination, demonstrating the lowest microleakage scores.     

Microleakage beneath ceramic and metal brackets bonded with a conventional and an antibacterial adhesive system

OBJECTIVE: To assess microleakage of a tooth-adhesive-bracket complex when metal or ceramic brackets were bonded with a conventional and an antibacterial self-etching adhesive. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty freshly extracted human premolars were randomly assigned to four equal groups and received the following treatments: group 1 = Transbond XT + metal bracket, group 2 = Transbond XT + ceramic bracket, group 3 = Clearfil Protect Bond + ceramic bracket, and group 4 = Clearfil Protect Bond + metal bracket. After photopolymerization, the teeth were kept in distilled water for 1 month and thereafter subjected to thermal cycling (500 cycles). Specimens were further sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for marginal microleakage for the adhesive-tooth and bracket-adhesive interfaces from incisal and gingival margins. Statistical analysis was accomplished by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: All groups demonstrated microleakage between the adhesive-enamel and bracket-adhesive interfaces. A significant difference was observed among all groups (P < .05) for the microleakage between the bracket-adhesive interface. Metal brackets exhibited significantly more microleakage than did ceramic brackets between the bracket-adhesive interface with either of the adhesives. Clearfil Protect Bond exhibited results similar to Transbond XT. Clearfil Protect Bond may be a choice of adhesive in bracket bonding because of its antibacterial activity and similar microleakage results with the orthodontic adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: Metal brackets cause more leakage between an adhesive-bracket interface, which may lead to lower clinical shear bond strength and white-spot lesions.     

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.     

Light curing time reduction: in vitro evaluation of new intensive light-emitting diode curing units

The aim of the present in vitro study was to establish the minimum necessary curing time to bond stainless steel brackets (Mini Diamond Twin) using new, intensive, light-emitting diode (LED) curing units. Seventy-five bovine primary incisors were divided into five equal groups. A standard light curing adhesive (Transbond XT) was used to bond the stainless steel brackets using different lamps and curing times. Two groups were bonded using an intensive LED curing lamp (Ortholux LED) for 5 and 10 seconds. Two more groups were bonded using another intensive LED curing device (Ultra-Lume LED 5) also for 5 and 10 seconds. Finally, a high-output halogen lamp (Optilux 501) was used for 40 seconds to bond the final group, which served as a positive control. All teeth were fixed in hard acrylic and stored for 24 hours in water at 37 degrees C. Shear bond strength (SBS) was measured using an Instron testing machine. Weibull distribution and analysis of variance were used to test for significant differences.The SBS values obtained were significantly different between groups (P < 0.001). When used for 10 seconds, the intensive LED curing units achieved sufficient SBS, comparable with the control. In contrast, 5 seconds resulted in significantly lower SBS. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was not significantly affected.A curing time of 10 seconds was found to be sufficient to bond metallic brackets to incisors using intensive LED curing units. These new, comparatively inexpensive, curing lamps seem to be an advantageous alternative to conventional halogen lamps for bonding orthodontic brackets.     

The effect of repeated bonding on the shear bond strength of different orthodontic adhesives.

One problem clinicians face during treatment is bracket failure. In a busy orthodontic practice, a significant number of teeth will need to be rebonded. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of repeated bonding with 2 different adhesives, a composite and a cyanoacrylate, on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Thirty-one freshly extracted human molars were collected. Brackets were bonded with 1 of the orthodontic adhesives according to the manufacturer's instructions. In group I, the teeth were etched with 37% phosphoric acid, a sealant was applied, and the brackets were bonded with Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and light cured for 20 seconds. In group II, the teeth were etched with 35% phosphoric acid, and the brackets were bonded with SmartBond (Gestenco International, G?thenburg, Sweden). In each group, the teeth were bonded and debonded 3 times with the same adhesive. At each sequence, the brackets were removed within 30 minutes after bonding to simulate the clinical condition at which a newly bonded bracket is tied to the archwire. Student t tests and the analysis of variance repeated measure were used to compare the shear bond strength between adhesives and within each adhesive at different debonding sequences. The results indicated that, at the first debonding sequence, the 2 adhesives did not have significantly different shear bond strengths. Between debonding sequence 1 and 2, there was a significant (P 相似文献   

Plasma versus Halogen Light: the Effect of Different Light Sources on the Shear Bond Strength of Brackets*

The aim of this study was to investigate differences between plasma and halogen light polymerization in relation to the attainable shear bond strength of brackets bonded with various adhesives. 720 brackets were divided into 72 different groups of n = 10. The brackets were bonded to 240 flat polished test specimens produced from bovine teeth, Pontor MPF alloy, and extra hard plaster (type III) respectively. Transbond XT, Kurasper F or Fuji Ortho LC served as adhesives to bond either ceramic (Transcend 6000) or stainless steel brackets (Mini Uni-Twin). 50% of all brackets were bonded with a minimum layer of adhesive, and the remaining 50% with an adhesive layer thickness of 1.0 mm. In 360 cases the adhesive was polymerized with a plasma light (PAC), and in a further 360 cases with a halogen light (Optilux 401). The light curing time was 10 s with plasma light and 40 s with halogen light. After 24 h of storage in deionized water at room temperature, all brackets were subjected to a shear bond strength test according to ISO standard 10477.The measured shear bond strength did not differ significantly between the two curing light sources. The 1 mm adhesive layer thickness group showed significantly higher shear bond strengths in comparison to the minimum layer thickness group.     

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.     

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.     

Influence of Adhesives and Methods of Enamel Pretreatment on the Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets

Aim

The objective of present study was to examine influence of adhesives and methods of enamel pretreatment on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets. The adhesives used were resin-reinforced glass ionomer cements-GIC (Fuji Ortho LC) and composite resin (Transbond XT).

Material and Methods

The experimental sample consisted of 80 extracted human first premolars. The sample was divided into four equal groups, and the metal brackets were bonded with different enamel pretreatments by using two adhesives: group A-10% polyacrylic acid; Fuji Ortho LC, group B–37% phosphoric acid; Fuji Ortho LC, group C–self etching primer; Transbond XT, group D–37% phosphoric acid, primer; Transbond XT. SBS of brackets was measured. After debonding of brackets, the adhesive remnant index (ARI) was evaluated.

Results

After the statistical analysis of the collected data was performed (ANOVA; Sheffe post-hoc test), the results showed that significantly lower SBS of the group B was found in relation to the groups C (p=0.031) and D (p=0.026). The results of ARI were similar in all testing groups and it was not possible to determine any statistically significant difference of the ARI (Chi- square test) between all four experimental groups.

Conclusion

The conclusion is that the use of composite resins material with appropriate enamel pretreatment according to manufacturer’s recommendation is the “gold standard” for brackets bonding for fixed orthodontic appliances.Key words: orthodontic brackets, shear strength, adhesive, enamel preparation     

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.     

An ex vivo investigation into the bond strength of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems.

The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of Adhesive Precoated Brackets (APC) with that of two types of uncoated bracket bases, Straight-Wire and Dyna-Lock. Two types of orthodontic adhesives were used, Transbond XT and Right-On. Three different curing times were evaluated with the APC brackets in order to find the best. Adhesive remnants on the enamel surface following debond were evaluated using the Adhesive Remnant Index (Artun and Bergland, 1984). Bond strengths ranged from 11.00 to 22.08 MPa. For both types of brackets Transbond produced a significant increase in bond strength compared to Right-On. The Dyna-Lock/Right-On combination produced the poorest results. APC brackets cured for 40 s had similar bond strengths to uncoated brackets fixed by means of Transbond. Overall, 79 per cent of specimens had less than half the tooth surface covered with adhesive following debond. Significantly more adhesive remained on tooth surfaces following debond of the Straight-Wire/Right-On group than any other bracket/adhesive combination. Bond strengths were higher with light-cured Transbond than with chemically-cured Right-On. When Transbond is used in association with APC brackets a 40-second cure time is recommended.     

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.     

A comparison of the shear bond strength of a resin cement and two orthodontic resin adhesive systems

The object of this study was to compare the shear bond strength and the quantity of adhesive remaining on the tooth after the debonding of brackets bonded with two light-cured orthodontic resin adhesive systems (Transbond XT and Light-Bond) and a dual-cured resin cement (RelyX Unicem). Seventy-five premolars were divided into three groups. In each group, brackets were bonded with one of the adhesives according to the manufacturer's instructions. Shear bond strength was measured using a universal test machine at a crosshead speed of one mm/min, and adhesive remnant was quantified using image analysis equipment. Our results showed that the resin cement produced significantly lower bond strength than the two orthodontic resin adhesive systems. It was also observed that the bond strength produced by Light-Bond was significantly greater than that of Transbond XT. RelyX left significantly less remnant adhesive than Transbond XT and Light-Bond. Between the two orthodontic systems, Light-Bond left significantly less adhesive on the tooth than Transbond XT.     

The use of Ormocer as an alternative material for bonding orthodontic brackets

As new adhesives, composite resins, and bonding techniques were introduced, orthodontists adopted some of these innovations and added them to their armamentarium. The purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of two adhesive materials; one with an organically modified ceramic matrix, Admira (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany) and another that contains the traditional Bis GMA matrix namely Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif). The new materials have a lower wear rate and are more biocompatible than traditional composites. Forty molar teeth were randomly divided into two groups: 20 teeth bonded with the Transbond adhesive system and the other 20 teeth with the Admira bonding system. Student's t-test was used to compare the SBS of the two adhesives. Significance was predetermined at P < or = .05. The results of the t-test comparisons (t = 0.489) of the SBS indicated that there was no significant (P = .628) difference between the two adhesives tested. The mean SBS for Admira was 5.1 +/- 3.3 MPa and that for Transbond XT was 4.6 +/- 3.2 MPa. It was concluded that the new material, Ormocer, which is an organically modified ceramic restorative material can potentially have orthodontic applications if available in a more flowable paste. These new materials are more biocompatible and have lower wear rate including bonding orthodontic brackets to teeth.