Saliva Contamination Effect on Shear Bond Strength of Self-etching Primer with Different Debond Times

Türk, Tamer; Elekdağ-Türk, Selma; Isci, Devrim; Cakmak, Fethiye; Özkalaycı, Nurhat

doi:10.2319/100906-415

Cited by 22 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thereby, glycoproteins may 24,[38][39] and reduce bond strength. 9,17,24,26,40 As a consequence, the nano-interaction zone 41 and the intercrystallite nano-interaction/-retention layer 42 will not be well created due to saliva protein interference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…32 Discrepancies regarding the previously reported bond strength values might result from the different surface treatments, different modes of measurement and different operators. [33][34] Regarding the effect of saliva contamination on the enamel bond strength of self-etching adhesives, in previous studies, self-etching adhesives were usually used prior to bracket bonding [6][7][8][9][10][16][17][18][26][27] or placement of the fissure sealants [21][22][23] and they were rarely applied with salivary contamination for resin restorations. 24 In the current study, short-term contamination with saliva either before or after priming had a detrimental effect on the enamel µTBS of self-etching adhesives (p<0.001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of previously published reports have focused on the influence of saliva on orthodontic adhesives [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] or fissure sealants, [19][20][21][22][23] and only a few reports have dealt with the effect of salivary contamination on resin restorations. 24 Controversial data have been reported regarding the effect of saliva contamination on the enamel bond strength of adhesives, because it depends not only on the individual adhesive used, but also on the adhesive in combination with the primer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 However, Transbond SEP or iBond (a self-etching adhesive, Heraeus Kulzer, LLC, South Bend, IN, USA) were less influenced by water and saliva contamination than MIP and Transbond XT. 9,18 More interestingly, Turk and others 17 demonstrated that the bond strength of Transbond SEP was not significantly reduced by saliva contamination before priming for a short storage time in water (5, 15 or 30 minutes) and was significantly reduced after 24 hours of water storage, but it was low and clinically acceptable for bracket bonding.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effect of Saliva Contamination and Decontamination on Bovine Enamel Bond Strength of Four Self-etching Adhesives

Jiang¹,

Pan²,

Liu³

et al. 2010

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYObjective: This study evaluated the effect of saliva contamination on the bovine enamel microtensile bond strengths (µTBS) of four selfetching adhesives. Materials and Methods: The labial enamel surfaces of extracted non-carious bovine incisors were serially wet ground. The enamel surfaces were not contaminated (Group A), contaminated with saliva before/after priming (Groups B/C) or they were water-sprayed after salivary contamination occurred before/ after priming (Groups D/E). Four self-etching adhesives and the corresponding resin composites from the same manufacturer (Clearfil SE Bond + Clearfil AP-X, Kuraray Co; Xeno III + Ceram X, Densply; Frog + Ice, SDI; FL Bond II + Beautifil II, Shofu Inc) were applied onto the enamel surfaces. The µTBS tests were performed with a micro tester (BISCO, Inc). The enamel surface was analyzed with AFM (Atomic Force Microscopy) before/after salivary contamination occurred or after the saliva-contaminated enamel was water-sprayed. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, factorial design ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's HSD multiple comparisons. Salivary contamination before and after priming could significantly reduce the enamel bond strength of self-etching adhesives. Proper isolation should be performed before and during application of the adhesives and placement of the resin composite. Thorough water-spraying could significantly improve the µTBS of saliva-contaminated enamel.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of Saliva Contamination and Decontamination on Bovine Enamel Bond Strength of Four Self-etching Adhesives

Jiang¹,

Pan²,

Liu³

et al. 2010

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…29 Similarly, our results demonstrated that the type of bonding agent is important for the shear bond strength. The only significant difference was recorded between the groups regarding the type of bonding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Comparison of the Shear Bond Strengths of Ceramic Brackets Using either a Self-Etching Primer or the Conventional Method after Intracoronal Bleaching

Ozlu¹,

Koçak²,

Koçak³

et al. 2016

Turk J Orthod

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the initial shear bond strengths (SBSs) of ceramic brackets using either a self-etching primer (SEP) or the conventional method (CM) after intracoronal bleaching with sodium perborate and distilled water.Methods: Eighty human incisors were divided into four groups according to bleaching and bonding procedures: Group 1, bleaching was not applied and the brackets were bonded with a self-etching primer; Group 2, bleaching was not applied and the brackets were bonded with the conventional method; Group 3, intracoronal bleaching with sodium perborate was applied for three weeks and the brackets were bonded with a self-etching primer; and Group 4, intracoronal bleaching with sodium perborate was applied for three weeks and the brackets were bonded with the conventional method. A self-etching primer (Transbond Plus) was applied as recommended by the manufacturer. After SEP application, the ceramic brackets were bonded with a light-curing adhesive (Transbond XT). For the conventional method, the teeth were etched with 37% phosphoric acid. After etching, a thin uniform coat of primer (Transbond XT Primer) was applied and the ceramic brackets were bonded with a light-curing adhesive (Transbond XT). SBSs were measured after water storage for 30 days, after 1000 cycles of thermocycling between 5°C and 55°C. Bond failure location was determined with the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI).Results: For the SEP method, there was no significant difference between SBS values of the bleaching and non-bleaching groups. Furthermore, for the conventional method, the SBS value of the non-bleaching group was not significantly different from that of the bleaching group. SBS values of the SEP method presented significant differences from those of the conventional method (p<0.001). SBS values of SEP application decreased with and without bleaching. The ARI scores did not show any significant difference among the groups (p=0.174). Conclusion:Intracoronal bleaching with sodium perborate and distilled water did not affect the SBS values of ceramic brackets.

show abstract

Shear bond strength of rebonded brackets after removal of adhesives with Er,Cr:YSGG laser

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to examine the bond strength of rebonded orthodontic brackets after adhesive residuals on the surface of the bracket bases were removed by Er,Cr:YSGG lasers. Seventy-six brackets bonded to premolars with a self-etching primer adhesive system were equally divided into four groups after the first debonding with the bracket bases (Group 1) untreated, and treated by (Group 2) Er,Cr:YSGG laser, (Group 3) sandblaster, and (Group 4) Er,Cr:YSGG laser/sandblaster. The treated brackets were rebonded to the new premolars in the same manner as the first-stage experiment. The shear bond strengths were measured, with the bonding/debonding procedures repeated once after the first debonding, and the bracket/adhesive failure modes were evaluated after each debonding. The treated bracket base surfaces were observed under a scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The mean rebond strengths were significantly lower in group 1 than in other groups, and there were no significant differences between the other groups. The mean initial bond strength was significantly higher than the mean rebond strength in group 1 but there was no significant difference between the two in the other three groups. Failures at the bracket-adhesive interface occurred frequently at second debonding in group 1. Under the SEM, residual adhesive was removed from the bracket bases by Er,Cr:YSGG laser, while adhesive remnant was seen underneath the meshwork of the bracket bases and microroughness appeared on the meshwork after sandblasting. Er,Cr:YSGG laser certainly could serve the purpose of promoting the use of recycled orthodontic brackets.

show abstract

Saliva Contamination Effect on Shear Bond Strength of Self-etching Primer with Different Debond Times

Abstract: SEP (Transbond Plus) may produce clinically acceptable bracket bonding after 5, 15, and 30 minutes from time of placement on the teeth, even with light and heavy saliva contamination.

Cited by 22 publications

References 17 publications

Effect of Saliva Contamination and Decontamination on Bovine Enamel Bond Strength of Four Self-etching Adhesives

Effect of Saliva Contamination and Decontamination on Bovine Enamel Bond Strength of Four Self-etching Adhesives

Comparison of the Shear Bond Strengths of Ceramic Brackets Using either a Self-Etching Primer or the Conventional Method after Intracoronal Bleaching

Shear bond strength of rebonded brackets after removal of adhesives with Er,Cr:YSGG laser

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About