Arshya A Kumar, Ravindra Kumar Jain, T R Prasanna Aravind
{"title":"<i>In vivo</i> comparative assessment of bracket bond failure rates of single-component adhesives.","authors":"Arshya A Kumar, Ravindra Kumar Jain, T R Prasanna Aravind","doi":"10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_44_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single-component adhesives do not require the application of a primer on the enamel surface that has been etched and has been reported to have acceptable shear bond strengths on <i>in vitro</i> evaluation.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This split-mouth study aimed to examine and assess the rates of bracket bond failure of hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-based (Aqualine LC) and bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (BisGMA)-based (Orthofix SPA) single-component adhesives used to bond orthodontic brackets over 6 months.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This <i>in vivo</i> study involved the participation of 50 adult subjects, with 1080 metallic brackets directly bonded to the labial/facial surface in a split-mouth design. After 6 months of treatment, 49 patients with 490 brackets bonded using a HEMA-based adhesive and 490 brackets bonded using a BisGMA-based adhesive were evaluated for bracket bond failures. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were done to compare the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall bracket bond failure rate (BFR) with single-component adhesives was 6.02%. Bracket BFRs of HEMA-based and BisGMA-based adhesives were 4.16% and 7.8%, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Significant differences in BFRs between maxillary teeth (4.28%) and mandibular teeth (7.75%) were noted (<i>P</i> < 0.05). No significant differences in bond failures between either side or region were noted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bond failures were more in brackets bonded with BisGMA-based adhesive (Orthofix SPA) compared with HEMA-based adhesive (Aqualine LC). Bond failures were less in the maxillary arch.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11141899/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_44_23","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Single-component adhesives do not require the application of a primer on the enamel surface that has been etched and has been reported to have acceptable shear bond strengths on in vitro evaluation.
Aim: This split-mouth study aimed to examine and assess the rates of bracket bond failure of hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-based (Aqualine LC) and bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (BisGMA)-based (Orthofix SPA) single-component adhesives used to bond orthodontic brackets over 6 months.
Materials and methods: This in vivo study involved the participation of 50 adult subjects, with 1080 metallic brackets directly bonded to the labial/facial surface in a split-mouth design. After 6 months of treatment, 49 patients with 490 brackets bonded using a HEMA-based adhesive and 490 brackets bonded using a BisGMA-based adhesive were evaluated for bracket bond failures. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were done to compare the results.
Results: The overall bracket bond failure rate (BFR) with single-component adhesives was 6.02%. Bracket BFRs of HEMA-based and BisGMA-based adhesives were 4.16% and 7.8%, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Significant differences in BFRs between maxillary teeth (4.28%) and mandibular teeth (7.75%) were noted (P < 0.05). No significant differences in bond failures between either side or region were noted.
Conclusion: Bond failures were more in brackets bonded with BisGMA-based adhesive (Orthofix SPA) compared with HEMA-based adhesive (Aqualine LC). Bond failures were less in the maxillary arch.
期刊介绍：
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
