Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pithon,Matheus Melo
Data de Publicação: 2007
Outros Autores: Oliveira,Márlio Vinícius de, Ruellas,Antonio Carlos de Oliveira, Bolognese,Ana Maria, Romano,Fábio Lourenço
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572007000200010
Resumo: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the shear bond strength to enamel and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) of both metallic and polycarbonate brackets bonded under different conditions. Ninety bovine permanent mandibular incisors were embedded in acrylic resin using PVC rings as molds and assigned to 6 groups (n=15). In Groups 1 (control) and 3, metallic and polycarbonate orthodontic brackets were, respectively, bonded to the enamel surfaces using Transbond XT composite according to the manufacturer's recommendations. In Groups 2 and 4, both types of brackets were bonded to enamel with Transbond XT composite, but XT primer was replaced by the OrthoPrimer agent. In Groups 5 and 6, the polycarbonate bracket bases were sandblasted with 50-mm aluminum-oxide particle stream and bonded to the enamel surfaces prepared under the same conditions described in Groups 3 and 4, respectively. After bonding, the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 hours and then submitted to shear bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results (MPa) showed no statistically significant difference between Groups 4 and 6 (p>0.05). Likewise, no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) were found among Groups 1, 2, and 5, although their results were significantly lower than those of Groups 4 and 6 (p<0.05). Group 3 had statistically significant lower bond strength than Groups 2, 4, and 6, but no statistically significant differences were found on comparison to Groups 1 and 5. A larger number of fractures at the bracket/composite interface were evidenced by the ARI scores. OrthoPrimer bonding agent yielded higher bond strength in the groups using either conventional or sandblasted polycarbonate brackets, which was not observed in the groups using metallic brackets.
id USP-17_516cd932c61b5b68d7fcb3ade700c872
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1678-77572007000200010
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditionsShear strengthDental bondingOrthodontic bracketsThe purpose of the present study was to evaluate the shear bond strength to enamel and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) of both metallic and polycarbonate brackets bonded under different conditions. Ninety bovine permanent mandibular incisors were embedded in acrylic resin using PVC rings as molds and assigned to 6 groups (n=15). In Groups 1 (control) and 3, metallic and polycarbonate orthodontic brackets were, respectively, bonded to the enamel surfaces using Transbond XT composite according to the manufacturer's recommendations. In Groups 2 and 4, both types of brackets were bonded to enamel with Transbond XT composite, but XT primer was replaced by the OrthoPrimer agent. In Groups 5 and 6, the polycarbonate bracket bases were sandblasted with 50-mm aluminum-oxide particle stream and bonded to the enamel surfaces prepared under the same conditions described in Groups 3 and 4, respectively. After bonding, the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 hours and then submitted to shear bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results (MPa) showed no statistically significant difference between Groups 4 and 6 (p>0.05). Likewise, no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) were found among Groups 1, 2, and 5, although their results were significantly lower than those of Groups 4 and 6 (p<0.05). Group 3 had statistically significant lower bond strength than Groups 2, 4, and 6, but no statistically significant differences were found on comparison to Groups 1 and 5. A larger number of fractures at the bracket/composite interface were evidenced by the ARI scores. OrthoPrimer bonding agent yielded higher bond strength in the groups using either conventional or sandblasted polycarbonate brackets, which was not observed in the groups using metallic brackets.Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP2007-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572007000200010Journal of Applied Oral Science v.15 n.2 2007reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP10.1590/S1678-77572007000200010info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPithon,Matheus MeloOliveira,Márlio Vinícius deRuellas,Antonio Carlos de OliveiraBolognese,Ana MariaRomano,Fábio Lourençoeng2007-06-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1678-77572007000200010Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2007-06-19T00:00Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
title Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
spellingShingle Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
Pithon,Matheus Melo
Shear strength
Dental bonding
Orthodontic brackets
title_short Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
title_full Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
title_fullStr Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
title_full_unstemmed Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
title_sort Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to enamel under different surface treatment conditions
author Pithon,Matheus Melo
author_facet Pithon,Matheus Melo
Oliveira,Márlio Vinícius de
Ruellas,Antonio Carlos de Oliveira
Bolognese,Ana Maria
Romano,Fábio Lourenço
author_role author
author2 Oliveira,Márlio Vinícius de
Ruellas,Antonio Carlos de Oliveira
Bolognese,Ana Maria
Romano,Fábio Lourenço
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pithon,Matheus Melo
Oliveira,Márlio Vinícius de
Ruellas,Antonio Carlos de Oliveira
Bolognese,Ana Maria
Romano,Fábio Lourenço
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Shear strength
Dental bonding
Orthodontic brackets
topic Shear strength
Dental bonding
Orthodontic brackets
description The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the shear bond strength to enamel and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) of both metallic and polycarbonate brackets bonded under different conditions. Ninety bovine permanent mandibular incisors were embedded in acrylic resin using PVC rings as molds and assigned to 6 groups (n=15). In Groups 1 (control) and 3, metallic and polycarbonate orthodontic brackets were, respectively, bonded to the enamel surfaces using Transbond XT composite according to the manufacturer's recommendations. In Groups 2 and 4, both types of brackets were bonded to enamel with Transbond XT composite, but XT primer was replaced by the OrthoPrimer agent. In Groups 5 and 6, the polycarbonate bracket bases were sandblasted with 50-mm aluminum-oxide particle stream and bonded to the enamel surfaces prepared under the same conditions described in Groups 3 and 4, respectively. After bonding, the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 hours and then submitted to shear bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results (MPa) showed no statistically significant difference between Groups 4 and 6 (p>0.05). Likewise, no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) were found among Groups 1, 2, and 5, although their results were significantly lower than those of Groups 4 and 6 (p<0.05). Group 3 had statistically significant lower bond strength than Groups 2, 4, and 6, but no statistically significant differences were found on comparison to Groups 1 and 5. A larger number of fractures at the bracket/composite interface were evidenced by the ARI scores. OrthoPrimer bonding agent yielded higher bond strength in the groups using either conventional or sandblasted polycarbonate brackets, which was not observed in the groups using metallic brackets.
publishDate 2007
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2007-04-01
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=S1678-77572007000200010
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572007000200010
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1678-77572007000200010
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 Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science v.15 n.2 2007
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1748936434695274496