Shear Bond Strength of Brackets Rebonded with a Fluoride-Releasing and -Recharging Adhesive System

Endo, Toshiya; Ozoe, Rieko; Shinkai, Koichi; Aoyagi, Makiko; Kurokawa, Hiroomi; Katoh, Yoshiroh; Shimooka, Shohachi

doi:10.2319/0003-3219(2009)079[0564:sbsobr]2.0.co;2

Cited by 10 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In orthodontics, a lower ARI score is favourable because the clinician must remove any remaining adhesive from the tooth after debonding 31,34) . Significant differences in the distribution of the ARI scores between BO, TX, and TP indicated that the use of BO resulted in more frequent bond failure at the enamel-adhesive interface 27,30,32) . Hence, the advantage of the self-etching BO in facilitating clean-up of the enamel surface would be mitigated by the corresponding decrease in SBS between the enamel and bonding resin 19,27,30) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lower SBS of BO, compared to TP and TX 33) , may arise from the reduced penetration of the adhesive resin into the enamel surface. Indeed, lower porosity in BO systems has been observed via SEM micrographs of untreated enamel surfaces, phosphoric acid-etched surfaces, and self-etched surfaces (TP and BO) 31,32) . Enamel surfaces treated with the two selfetched primers were demineralized to a lesser extent than enamel surfaces conventionally etched with 37% phosphoric acid 31,32) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, lower porosity in BO systems has been observed via SEM micrographs of untreated enamel surfaces, phosphoric acid-etched surfaces, and self-etched surfaces (TP and BO) 31,32) . Enamel surfaces treated with the two selfetched primers were demineralized to a lesser extent than enamel surfaces conventionally etched with 37% phosphoric acid 31,32) . Numerous authors have discussed the advantages and disadvantages of indirect bonding compared to direct bonding, and all agree that the indirect system is more accurate [9][10][11] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies have investigated the strength of self-etching primer systems 15,18,19,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] . Most of these studies demonstrated that self-etching systems have significantly lower SBS values than conventional acidetching systems 18,24,26,34,35) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of enamel-bracket bond strength using direct- and indirect-bonding techniques with a self-etching ion releasing S-PRG filler

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This in vitro study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of two systems for bonding orthodontic brackets to enamel. The first system involved a self-etching primer (Beauty Ortho Bond, BO) containing surface pre-reacted glass filler. The second involved a primer applied with phosphoric acid etching (Transbond XT, TX). Ninety-six extracted human premolars were divided into eight groups: Group I (TX/direct bonding), Group II (TX/indirect bonding), Group III (BO/direct bonding), and Group IV (BO/indirect bonding). Groups V-VIII were identical to Groups I-IV, respectively, but were also subjected to 1,500 thermal cycles between 5 and 55°C. ARI was scored by binocular microscopy. SBS was analyzed by three-way ANOVA and the Bonferroni test. ARI was analyzed by the chi-squared test. The BO groups showed lower SBS and ARI results than the TX groups. SBS was significantly influenced by the primer material, bonding technique, and thermal cycling.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of enamel-bracket bond strength using direct- and indirect-bonding techniques with a self-etching ion releasing S-PRG filler

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These observations are in agreement with previous results 6,7) . Endo et al 29) reported that enamel treated with 35% phosphoric acid becomes very porous, and numerous enamel crystallites and honeycomb structures are observable after phosphoric acid etching. The pretreatment with TX resulted in more frequent porosities on the enamel surfaces than the BO and OL pretreatments, although the enamel surfaces in all the self-etching adhesive groups were generally not very demineralized, as observed in previous studies 6,30) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atomic force microscopy observation of enamel surfaces treated with selfetching primer

Hashimoto

Nishiura

et al. 2013

Dent. Mater. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontists use a self-etching adhesive system when attaching brackets to enamel. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the erosion effects of common clinically used adhesive systems on human enamel surfaces by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Four commercially available adhesive systems (i.e., Kurasper F, Beauty Ortho Bond, Orthophia LC, and Transbond XT) were applied to ground enamel surfaces of extracted human teeth. Enamel surface roughness (ESR), absolute depth profile (ADP), and surface hardness were evaluated by AFM. The ESR and ADP were significantly higher after the pretreatment with the phosphoric acidetching adhesive system than after the pretreatments with the three self-etching adhesive systems. The surface nanohardness decreased after the pretreatment with the phosphoric acid-etching adhesive system but increased after the pretreatments with the self-etching adhesive systems. These results suggest that the use of a self-etching primer for enamel conditioning might prevent decalcification caused by phosphoric acid etching.

show abstract

Comparative study of dental enamel loss after debonding braces by analytical scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

Rodríguez‐Chávez

Arenas-Alatorre²,

Belío-Reyes

2017

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical procedures when shear forces are applied to brackets suggest adhesion forces between 2.8 and 10.0 MPa as appropriate. In this study dental enamel was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after removing the brackets. Thirty bicuspids (previous prophylaxis) with metallic brackets (Roth Inovation 0.022 GAC), Transbond Plus SEP 3M Unitek adhesive and Transbond XT 3M resin were used. The samples were preserved to 37°C during 24 hr and submited to tangential forces with the Instron Universal machine 1.0 mm/min speed load strength resistance debonding. Also the Adhesive Remanent Index (ARI) test was made, evaluating the bracket base and the bicuspid surface. All the bracket SEM images were processed with AutoCAD to determine the enamel detached area. The average value was 6.86 MPa (SD ± 3.2 MPa). ARI value 1= 63.3%, value 2= 20%, value 3= 13.3% and 33% presented value 0. All those samples with dental enamel loss, presented different situations as fractures, ledges, horizontal, and vertical loss in some cases, and some scratch lines. There is no association between the debonding resistance and enamel presence. Less than half of the remanent adhesive on the dental enamel was present in most of the samples when the ARI test was applied. When the resin area increases, the debonding resistance also increases, and when the enamel loss increases, the resin free metallic area of the bracket base decreases in the debonding.

show abstract

Shear Bond Strength of Brackets Rebonded with a Fluoride-Releasing and -Recharging Adhesive System

Abstract: The fluoride-releasing and -recharging adhesive system with the self-etching primer (Beauty Ortho Bond) had clinically sufficient shear bond strength in repeated bracket bonding; this finding can help orthodontists to decrease the risk of damage to enamel at debonding.

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of enamel-bracket bond strength using direct- and indirect-bonding techniques with a self-etching ion releasing S-PRG filler

Comparison of enamel-bracket bond strength using direct- and indirect-bonding techniques with a self-etching ion releasing S-PRG filler

Atomic force microscopy observation of enamel surfaces treated with selfetching primer

Comparative study of dental enamel loss after debonding braces by analytical scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About