Comparison of the shear bond strength of new and recycled metallic brackets using different adhesive materials. An in vitro study

Nicole Ibarra; Mackarena Sáez; Victor Rojas; Rodrigo Oyonarte

Makale detayları

Comparison of the shear bond strength of new and recycled metallic brackets using different adhesive materials. An in vitro study

Yazarlar:

Nicole Ibarra | Mackarena Sáez | Victor Rojas | Rodrigo Oyonarte

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dentistry

Dergi:

European Oral Research Vol.57 Issue 2, pp.96-102

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001292012

pISSN:

2630-6158

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Purpose To evaluate and compare shear bond strength SBS of new and recycled metallic brackets bonded to conditioned and reconditioned enamel, using two different adhesive materials. Material and Method 72 extracted sound human premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups. Transbond XT light cured composite LCC and Fuji Ortho LC resin-modified glass ionomer RMGI, were used as adhesive materials. In groups 1 and 2 control, new brackets were bonded to sound premolars using either LCC or RMGI, respectively. In Groups 3 and 4, new brackets were bonded to reconditioned enamel; and in groups 5 and 6, sandblasted recycled brackets were rebonded to reconditioned enamel. After 5.000 thermal cycles between 5ºC and 55ºC, SBS was evaluated and adhesive remnant on the enamel assessed using the ARI index. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk, ANOVA, Fligner-Killeen ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in SBS comparing control and experimental groups for either new or recycled brackets p  0.848. The SBS was significantly higher in brackets bonded with LCC 15.7 MPa than RMGI 11.6 MPa p  0.006. Adhesive failure was the most frequent, with the adhesive remnant covering more than 50 of the bracket base. Conclusion No significant differences were observed in SBS using either new or recycled brackets, regardless of the dental surface treatment conditioned or reconditioned. Significantly higher SBS values were obtained with LCC adhesive. Adhesive failure prevails in all groups.

 Purpose To evaluate and compare shear bond strength SBS of new and recycled metallic brackets bonded to conditioned and reconditioned enamel, using two different adhesive materials. Material and Method 72 extracted sound human premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups. Transbond XT light cured composite LCC and Fuji Ortho LC resin-modified glass ionomer RMGI, were used as adhesive materials. In groups 1 and 2 control, new brackets were bonded to sound premolars using either LCC or RMGI, respectively. In Groups 3 and 4, new brackets were bonded to reconditioned enamel; and in groups 5 and 6, sandblasted recycled brackets were rebonded to reconditioned enamel. After 5.000 thermal cycles between 5ºC and 55ºC, SBS was evaluated and adhesive remnant on the enamel assessed using the ARI index. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk, ANOVA, Fligner-Killeen ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in SBS comparing control and experimental groups for either new or recycled brackets p  0.848. The SBS was significantly higher in brackets bonded with LCC 15.7 MPa than RMGI 11.6 MPa p  0.006. Adhesive failure was the most frequent, with the adhesive remnant covering more than 50 of the bracket base. Conclusion No significant differences were observed in SBS using either new or recycled brackets, regardless of the dental surface treatment conditioned or reconditioned. Significantly higher SBS values were obtained with LCC adhesive. Adhesive failure prevails in all groups.

 Purpose To evaluate and compare shear bond strength SBS of new and recycled metallic brackets bonded to conditioned and reconditioned enamel, using two different adhesive materials. Material and Method 72 extracted sound human premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups. Transbond XT light cured composite LCC and Fuji Ortho LC resin-modified glass ionomer RMGI, were used as adhesive materials. In groups 1 and 2 control, new brackets were bonded to sound premolars using either LCC or RMGI, respectively. In Groups 3 and 4, new brackets were bonded to reconditioned enamel; and in groups 5 and 6, sandblasted recycled brackets were rebonded to reconditioned enamel. After 5.000 thermal cycles between 5ºC and 55ºC, SBS was evaluated and adhesive remnant on the enamel assessed using the ARI index. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk, ANOVA, Fligner-Killeen ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in SBS comparing control and experimental groups for either new or recycled brackets p  0.848. The SBS was significantly higher in brackets bonded with LCC 15.7 MPa than RMGI 11.6 MPa p  0.006. Adhesive failure was the most frequent, with the adhesive remnant covering more than 50 of the bracket base. Conclusion No significant differences were observed in SBS using either new or recycled brackets, regardless of the dental surface treatment conditioned or reconditioned. Significantly higher SBS values were obtained with LCC adhesive. Adhesive failure prevails in all groups.

 Purpose To evaluate and compare shear bond strength SBS of new and recycled metallic brackets bonded to conditioned and reconditioned enamel, using two different adhesive materials. Material and Method 72 extracted sound human premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups. Transbond XT light cured composite LCC and Fuji Ortho LC resin-modified glass ionomer RMGI, were used as adhesive materials. In groups 1 and 2 control, new brackets were bonded to sound premolars using either LCC or RMGI, respectively. In Groups 3 and 4, new brackets were bonded to reconditioned enamel; and in groups 5 and 6, sandblasted recycled brackets were rebonded to reconditioned enamel. After 5.000 thermal cycles between 5ºC and 55ºC, SBS was evaluated and adhesive remnant on the enamel assessed using the ARI index. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk, ANOVA, Fligner-Killeen ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in SBS comparing control and experimental groups for either new or recycled brackets p  0.848. The SBS was significantly higher in brackets bonded with LCC 15.7 MPa than RMGI 11.6 MPa p  0.006. Adhesive failure was the most frequent, with the adhesive remnant covering more than 50 of the bracket base. Conclusion No significant differences were observed in SBS using either new or recycled brackets, regardless of the dental surface treatment conditioned or reconditioned. Significantly higher SBS values were obtained with LCC adhesive. Adhesive failure prevails in all groups.

Makale detayları

Comparison of the shear bond strength of new and recycled metallic brackets using different adhesive materials. An in vitro study

Yazarlar:

Nicole Ibarra | Mackarena Sáez | Victor Rojas | Rodrigo Oyonarte

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dentistry

Dergi:

European Oral Research Vol.57 Issue 2, pp.96-102

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001292012

pISSN:

2630-6158

Shear bond strength

Metallic brackets

Adhesive materials

Recycled brackets

Thermal cycling

Sayı

Makale detayları

Comparison of the shear bond strength of new and recycled metallic brackets using different adhesive materials. An in vitro study

Yazarlar: Nicole Ibarra | Mackarena Sáez | Victor Rojas | Rodrigo Oyonarte

Yayıncı: Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar: Dentistry

Dergi: European Oral Research Vol.57 Issue 2, pp.96-102

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 5/2023

Belge Dili: İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.): 2001292012

pISSN: 2630-6158

Shear bond strength

Metallic brackets

Adhesive materials

Recycled brackets

Thermal cycling

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Nicole Ibarra | Mackarena Sáez | Victor Rojas | Rodrigo Oyonarte

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Dentistry

Dergi:

European Oral Research Vol.57 Issue 2, pp.96-102

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001292012

pISSN:

2630-6158