Objective: To test the null hypothesis that enamel deproteinization with 10% papain gel does not increase the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC). Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty bovine incisors were used and divided into eight groups: 1) Transbond XT according to the manufacturer's recommendations, 2) Transbond XT deproteinized with 10% papain gel, 3) RMGIC without enamel deproteinization and without etching, 4) RMGIC without enamel etching and with deproteinization with 10% papain gel, 5) RMGIC deproteinized with 10% papain gel and etched with polyacrylic acid, 6) RMGIC deproteinized with 10% papain gel and etched with phosphoric acid, 7) RMGIC deproteinized with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite, and 8) RMGIC etched with polyacrylic acid. After bonding, the mechanical tests were performed in a Universal mechanical test machine. The values obtained were submitted to an analysis of variance and afterward to the Tukey test (P , .05). Results: It was demonstrated that group 2 presented the highest shear bond strength value, and this differed statistically from the others; group 3 presented the lowest value and showed no differences from groups 4, 5, 7, and 8. Regarding the Adhesive Remnant Index, groups 2 and 6 presented the best results and groups 3 and 8 the worst. It could be concluded that enamel deproteinization with 10% papain gel increases the shear bond strength, irrespective of the etching agent. Conclusions: The hypothesis is rejected. Papain gel was shown to be a new ally in the orthodontic clinic. (Angle Orthod. 2012;82:541-545.)
The aim of the present study was to evaluate which material and technique were the best for bonding 3x3 lingual retainer. One hundred and five bovine mandibular incisors were used, to which contention bars with a standardized size of 7 mm were bonded to the lingual surface. Initially all teeth received prophylaxis with pumice stone and water. After this they were randomly divided into seven groups, denominated and characterized as follows: Group (1) bars bonded with Transbond XT in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions; (2) Tooth surface etching with self-etching agent Transbond (SEPT) followed by bonding with Transbond XT; (3) Bonding with Transbond Plus Color Change (TPCC) without adhesive; (4) Bonding with TPCC + SEPT; (5) Bonding with restorative composite Z100 + adhesive Prime Bond, (6) Z100 without adhesive and (7) Z100 + SEPT. Before bonding in Groups 1, 3, 5 and 6 the lingual surface was etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 20 seconds, followed by washing and drying. After bonding the mechanical tests were performed in a Universal mechanical test machine. The values obtained were submitted to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and afterwards to the Tukey test (p<0.05). We observed absence of statistical differences among Groups 1, 2, 5 and 7 and among Groups 3, 4, 5 and 6 (p<0.05). Group 1 presented the highest bond strength value and Group 6 the lowest. It could be concluded that where bonding of lingual retainer is concerned; the best material to use is Transbond XT irrespective of the etching method, followed by composite Z100 etched with SEPT.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.