Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: SILVA,Sérgio Ricardo da
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: SILVA,Luciana Alves Herdy da, BASTING,Roberta Tarkany, LIMA-ARSATI,Ynara Bosco de Oliveira
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-25772017000300138
Resumo: Abstract Objective To evaluate the in vitro and in situ anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of materials containing fluoride (F), used for bracket bonding: Transbond XT (GT, negative control), Transbond Plus Color Change (GTF), Transbond-Self-Etching Primer (GSAF) and Vitremer (GV, positive control). Material and method In the in vitro study, the specimens were premolars with bonded brackets (n=12/group). After pH cycling, the F release, bond strength, fracture mode and presence of white spot lesions were assessed. In the in situ study, the specimens were enamel fragments with bonded brackets (n=12/group). Twelve volunteers wore palatal appliances in 4 phases, with cariogenic challenge. Bond strength, fracture mode and change in surface hardness (%SH) were determined. Result Relative to the in vitro study, F release (ppm) was: GT=0.257±0.068c; GTF=0.634±0.100b; GSAF=0.630±0.067b; GV=2.796±1.414a. Only GV showed no white spot lesions. Bond strength values (MPa) were GT=7.62±7.18a; GTF=5.15±6.91ab; GSAF=3.42±2.97bc; GV=2.87±2.09c. Adhesive fracture was the most frequent type, except for GTF. In the in situ study, %SH was: GT=-56.0±18.3a; GTF=-57.6±11.9a; GSAF=-57.1±11.3a; GV=-52.4±25.8a. Bond strength values were GT=9.5±4.4a; GTF=11.1±5.9a; GSAF=13.2± 6.6a; GV=6.6±4.0a. Cohesive fracture in material was the most frequent type, except for GTF. Conclusion Vitremer (GV) showed the highest anti-cariogenic potential in the in vitro study. However, it was not confirmed by the in situ study. Regarding bond strength values from the in situ study, all materials were shown to be adequate for clinical practice.
id UNESP-16_1c19491ed47cc3647d3c317e92d93f5e
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1807-25772017000300138
network_acronym_str UNESP-16
network_name_str Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bondingBond strengthbracket bondingfluoridedental cariesAbstract Objective To evaluate the in vitro and in situ anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of materials containing fluoride (F), used for bracket bonding: Transbond XT (GT, negative control), Transbond Plus Color Change (GTF), Transbond-Self-Etching Primer (GSAF) and Vitremer (GV, positive control). Material and method In the in vitro study, the specimens were premolars with bonded brackets (n=12/group). After pH cycling, the F release, bond strength, fracture mode and presence of white spot lesions were assessed. In the in situ study, the specimens were enamel fragments with bonded brackets (n=12/group). Twelve volunteers wore palatal appliances in 4 phases, with cariogenic challenge. Bond strength, fracture mode and change in surface hardness (%SH) were determined. Result Relative to the in vitro study, F release (ppm) was: GT=0.257±0.068c; GTF=0.634±0.100b; GSAF=0.630±0.067b; GV=2.796±1.414a. Only GV showed no white spot lesions. Bond strength values (MPa) were GT=7.62±7.18a; GTF=5.15±6.91ab; GSAF=3.42±2.97bc; GV=2.87±2.09c. Adhesive fracture was the most frequent type, except for GTF. In the in situ study, %SH was: GT=-56.0±18.3a; GTF=-57.6±11.9a; GSAF=-57.1±11.3a; GV=-52.4±25.8a. Bond strength values were GT=9.5±4.4a; GTF=11.1±5.9a; GSAF=13.2± 6.6a; GV=6.6±4.0a. Cohesive fracture in material was the most frequent type, except for GTF. Conclusion Vitremer (GV) showed the highest anti-cariogenic potential in the in vitro study. However, it was not confirmed by the in situ study. Regarding bond strength values from the in situ study, all materials were shown to be adequate for clinical practice.Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho2017-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-25772017000300138Revista de Odontologia da UNESP v.46 n.3 2017reponame:Revista de Odontologia da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESP10.1590/1807-2577.06716info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSILVA,Sérgio Ricardo daSILVA,Luciana Alves Herdy daBASTING,Roberta TarkanyLIMA-ARSATI,Ynara Bosco de Oliveiraeng2017-07-07T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1807-25772017000300138Revistahttps://www.revodontolunesp.com.br/PUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||adriana@foar.unesp.br1807-25770101-1774opendoar:2017-07-07T00:00Revista de Odontologia da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
title Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
spellingShingle Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
SILVA,Sérgio Ricardo da
Bond strength
bracket bonding
fluoride
dental caries
title_short Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
title_full Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
title_fullStr Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
title_sort Evaluation of the anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of different fluoridated materials used for bracket bonding
author SILVA,Sérgio Ricardo da
author_facet SILVA,Sérgio Ricardo da
SILVA,Luciana Alves Herdy da
BASTING,Roberta Tarkany
LIMA-ARSATI,Ynara Bosco de Oliveira
author_role author
author2 SILVA,Luciana Alves Herdy da
BASTING,Roberta Tarkany
LIMA-ARSATI,Ynara Bosco de Oliveira
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv SILVA,Sérgio Ricardo da
SILVA,Luciana Alves Herdy da
BASTING,Roberta Tarkany
LIMA-ARSATI,Ynara Bosco de Oliveira
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Bond strength
bracket bonding
fluoride
dental caries
topic Bond strength
bracket bonding
fluoride
dental caries
description Abstract Objective To evaluate the in vitro and in situ anti-cariogenic potential and bond strength to enamel of materials containing fluoride (F), used for bracket bonding: Transbond XT (GT, negative control), Transbond Plus Color Change (GTF), Transbond-Self-Etching Primer (GSAF) and Vitremer (GV, positive control). Material and method In the in vitro study, the specimens were premolars with bonded brackets (n=12/group). After pH cycling, the F release, bond strength, fracture mode and presence of white spot lesions were assessed. In the in situ study, the specimens were enamel fragments with bonded brackets (n=12/group). Twelve volunteers wore palatal appliances in 4 phases, with cariogenic challenge. Bond strength, fracture mode and change in surface hardness (%SH) were determined. Result Relative to the in vitro study, F release (ppm) was: GT=0.257±0.068c; GTF=0.634±0.100b; GSAF=0.630±0.067b; GV=2.796±1.414a. Only GV showed no white spot lesions. Bond strength values (MPa) were GT=7.62±7.18a; GTF=5.15±6.91ab; GSAF=3.42±2.97bc; GV=2.87±2.09c. Adhesive fracture was the most frequent type, except for GTF. In the in situ study, %SH was: GT=-56.0±18.3a; GTF=-57.6±11.9a; GSAF=-57.1±11.3a; GV=-52.4±25.8a. Bond strength values were GT=9.5±4.4a; GTF=11.1±5.9a; GSAF=13.2± 6.6a; GV=6.6±4.0a. Cohesive fracture in material was the most frequent type, except for GTF. Conclusion Vitremer (GV) showed the highest anti-cariogenic potential in the in vitro study. However, it was not confirmed by the in situ study. Regarding bond strength values from the in situ study, all materials were shown to be adequate for clinical practice.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-25772017000300138
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-25772017000300138
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1807-2577.06716
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista de Odontologia da UNESP v.46 n.3 2017
reponame:Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
collection Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista de Odontologia da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||adriana@foar.unesp.br
_version_ 1748958560348274688