Avaliação do Índice de Remanescente Adesivo utilizando braquetes com e sem tratamento na base e a interação com três sistemas de colagem

Pignatta, Lilian Maria Brisque; Lugato, Isabel Cristina Prado Torres; Bertóz, Francisco Antônio; Santos, Eduardo César Almada

doi:10.1590/s1415-54192009000100011

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several authors have advocated that it is preferable for adhesion failure to occur at the bracket-adhesive interface or within the adhesive so that the resin residue on the ceramic surface can be removed safely with rotary instruments. [ 30 35 36 37 38 ] Similarly, the adhesive failure in G2 (feldspathic conditioned by Transbond™ XT), G3 (lithium disilicate treated by Assure® Plus All), and G5 (zirconia conditioned by Assure® Plus All) was designated as mixed-type failures for all the specimens, indicating a favorable failure mode. Contrarily, all the samples in G6 (zirconia conditioned with Transbond™ XT) had a score “0” ARI designated to adhesive-ceramic interface failure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to ceramic surfaces utilizing different adhesive systems: An in vitro study

Bugaighis,

Paz Pulido,

Pereira

et al. 2023

J Orthodont Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: To compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to three different types of ceramic surfaces (feldspathic, lithium disilicate, and zirconium) using Assure® Plus All and Transbond™ XT adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample comprised 72 monolithic computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic samples that were randomly divided into six groups of 12 specimens each. Three groups (G1, feldspathic ceramic; G3, lithium disilicate ceramic; G5, zirconium surfaces) were bonded to metal brackets using Assure® Plus All adhesive, whereas the remaining three groups (G2, G4, G6; with the ceramic type in the same order as that in the previous groups) were bonded to metal brackets using Transbond™ XT. The samples were then subjected to 10,000 thermocycles. The SBS was calculated using the shear tests. The site of bonding failure was classified using the adhesive remnant index (ARI) score. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal–Wallis tests were used for statistical analyses at a 5% significance level. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed in the mean SBS values of the groups ( P < 0.001). The mean SBS for G6 (zirconium plus Transbond™ XT) (2.52 MPa) was significantly lower than that for all other groups. Furthermore, statistically significant differences were found in the ARI score distribution among the groups ( P < 0.001). Differences were identified between G6 and G3 (lithium disilicate Plus All Assure® Plus All) and G5 (zirconium plus Assure® Plus All). CONCLUSIONS: The mean bonding strength of brackets with Assure® Plus All was higher than that with Transbond™ XT for all three types of ceramics. However, all groups, except the zirconium plus Transbond™ XT group, showed acceptable bonding strength for orthodontic purposes. The application of hydrofluoric acid followed by silane and finally the Assure® Plus All adhesive system is adequate for bonding brackets to any of the ceramic tested surfaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to ceramic surfaces utilizing different adhesive systems: An in vitro study

Bugaighis,

Paz Pulido,

Pereira

et al. 2023

J Orthodont Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The base if each bracket and the ceramic cylinder surface were observed, and the failure patterns classified in accordance with the scores of Pignatta et al 17 : 1) all the adhesive on the tooth; 2)over 90% of the adhesive on the tooth; 3) over 10% and less than 90% of the adhesive on the tooth; 4) less than 10% of the adhesive on the tooth; and, 5) none of the adhesive on the tooth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Effect of etching time and light sources on the shear bond strength of metal brackets to ceramic cylinders

Piaia

Costa

Correr

et al. 2014

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the shear bond strength of brackets bonded to ceramic with Transbond XT resin, etching time intervals (1 and 2 minutes) and three Light sources (Xenon Plasma Arc, LED and Halogen Light ), with and without silane. Methods In total, 12 feldspathic ceramic cylinders (15 mm x 20 mm), etched with 10% hydrofluoric acid were used. For light activation, the brackets were divided according to the light source to be used (n-15): LED UltraLume 5 (L); Apollo 95E plasma arc (AP) and Halogen light XL 2500 (H).After 24 h the samples were submitted to shear bond strength testing at crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute.

show abstract

“…The mechanical tests were carried out on a universal testing machine, EZ-Test-Shimadzu®, with 200Kgf load cell and speed of 0.5 mm/min in occlusalgingival direction with an active chisel tip (Pignatta et al, 2009). The force required to take off each bracket was recorded and expressed in Newtons (N).…”

Section: Preparation Of Specimens and Shear Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Shear Bond Strength of Steel and Ceramic Orthodontic Brackets Bonded with Six Different Orthodontic Adhesives

Fonseca–Silva

Otoni

Magalhães

et al. 2020

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontic accessories bonding in tooth enamel has been a critical step since the introduction of direct bonding techniques due to the importance of bracket stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate adhesion strength of different adhesive systems used for bracket bonding on dental surface. The present in vitro study was made from the analysis of shear strength of steel and ceramic brackets bonding with six different types of orthodontic adhesives. The brackets were bonded to 120 human extracted first premolar teeth with Orthocem®, Orthocem® + Ambar Universal® primer, Orthobond Plus®, Biofix®, Transbond XT®, Ortholink VLC®. Shear strength tests were performed on a universal testing machine EZ-Test-Shimadzu® and the data were analyzed using ANOVA test with Post-Hoc Bonferroni and 95 % statistical significance (p <0.05). Transbond XT® and Ortholink VLC® resin values showed greater shear resistance for steel brackets bonding and Transbond XT® and Orthobond Plus® adhesives showed better adhesion results for ceramic brackets bonding.

show abstract

Avaliação do Índice de Remanescente Adesivo utilizando braquetes com e sem tratamento na base e a interação com três sistemas de colagem

Cited by 3 publications

References 27 publications

Comparison of shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to ceramic surfaces utilizing different adhesive systems: An in vitro study

Comparison of shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to ceramic surfaces utilizing different adhesive systems: An in vitro study

Effect of etching time and light sources on the shear bond strength of metal brackets to ceramic cylinders

Comparative Analysis of Shear Bond Strength of Steel and Ceramic Orthodontic Brackets Bonded with Six Different Orthodontic Adhesives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About