Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Edgewise Bracket Bonded to Composite Restoration by Using Three Regimes of Orthodontic Adhesive Systems (In Vitro Study)

H. Hasan, Bayan A. Hassan
{"title":"Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Edgewise Bracket Bonded to Composite Restoration by Using Three Regimes of Orthodontic Adhesive Systems (In Vitro Study)","authors":"H. Hasan, Bayan A. Hassan","doi":"10.26477/IDJ.V37I1.37","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Direct bonding of orthodontic attachment has removed some of the esthetic concerns many adults previously had when considering orthodontic therapy. With an increase in adult treatment comes the challenge of direct bonding to non-enamel surface, such as composite restoration. This in vitro study was designed to compare the effect of using three regimes of orthodontic adhesion systems on shear bond strength when bonded edgewise brackets to composite restoration. Materias and methods : The study samples were randomly divided into three groups (30 specimens each).Group I using resilience orthodontic adhesive material (4thgeneration) consist from acid-etching, primer and adhesive; group II using heliosit orthodontic adhesive (1stgeneration) consist from acid-etching and adhesive without bonding agent; group III using self-etching/self-bonding orthodontic adhesive (Totalcem) (7thgeneration). Results: The result of the study showed that the light cured bonding adhesive resilience orthodontic (group I) has the highest mean of shear bond strength (33.7 Mpa) followed by dual-cure automix bonding self-etch/self-bonding adhesive resin cement (23.6 Mpa). While the light cured bonding adhesive heliosit showed the lowest mean of shear bond strength (18.04 Mpa). The cohesive failure (score 2) was the predominant mode of the bond failure in group (I) (4thgeneration) of this study, also the adhesive– composite interface failure was the predominant especially in group (II) (1stgeneration). In group (III) (7thgeneration) while the adhesive -composite interface failure was predominant, but cohesive failure (score 2) and composite detachment (score 4) was found but in less percentage if compared with adhesive–composite interface failure in the same group.","PeriodicalId":78326,"journal":{"name":"Iraqi Dental Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iraqi Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26477/IDJ.V37I1.37","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Direct bonding of orthodontic attachment has removed some of the esthetic concerns many adults previously had when considering orthodontic therapy. With an increase in adult treatment comes the challenge of direct bonding to non-enamel surface, such as composite restoration. This in vitro study was designed to compare the effect of using three regimes of orthodontic adhesion systems on shear bond strength when bonded edgewise brackets to composite restoration. Materias and methods : The study samples were randomly divided into three groups (30 specimens each).Group I using resilience orthodontic adhesive material (4thgeneration) consist from acid-etching, primer and adhesive; group II using heliosit orthodontic adhesive (1stgeneration) consist from acid-etching and adhesive without bonding agent; group III using self-etching/self-bonding orthodontic adhesive (Totalcem) (7thgeneration). Results: The result of the study showed that the light cured bonding adhesive resilience orthodontic (group I) has the highest mean of shear bond strength (33.7 Mpa) followed by dual-cure automix bonding self-etch/self-bonding adhesive resin cement (23.6 Mpa). While the light cured bonding adhesive heliosit showed the lowest mean of shear bond strength (18.04 Mpa). The cohesive failure (score 2) was the predominant mode of the bond failure in group (I) (4thgeneration) of this study, also the adhesive– composite interface failure was the predominant especially in group (II) (1stgeneration). In group (III) (7thgeneration) while the adhesive -composite interface failure was predominant, but cohesive failure (score 2) and composite detachment (score 4) was found but in less percentage if compared with adhesive–composite interface failure in the same group.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
三种正畸粘接剂体系对边缘托槽复合修复体剪切粘结强度的比较(体外研究)
简介:直接结合的正畸附件已经消除了一些审美问题,许多成年人以前考虑正畸治疗时。随着成人治疗的增加,直接粘接到非牙釉质表面的挑战也随之而来,如复合修复。这项体外研究的目的是比较使用三种制度的正畸粘连系统的剪切结合强度的影响,当结合边缘托槽复合修复。材料与方法:将研究样本随机分为三组,每组30例。第一组采用弹性正畸粘接剂材料(第四代),由酸蚀、底漆、粘接剂组成;第二组使用heliosit正畸胶粘剂(第1代),由酸蚀和无粘结剂的胶粘剂组成;第三组使用自蚀刻/自粘接正畸粘接剂(Totalcem)(第7代)。结果:研究结果显示,光固化粘接弹性正畸(I组)的剪切强度均值最高(33.7 Mpa),其次是双固化自混合粘接自蚀刻/自粘接树脂水泥(23.6 Mpa)。光固化胶粘剂heliosit的剪切强度平均值最低,为18.04 Mpa。黏结破坏(2分)是本研究第4代(I)组粘结破坏的主要模式,粘接剂-复合材料界面破坏以第1代(II)组为主要模式。第三组(第7代)以粘接剂-复合材料界面破坏为主,但粘接剂破坏(2分)和复合材料脱离(4分)发生率低于同组的粘接剂-复合材料界面破坏。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
THE EFFECT OF AGING ON SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF PROVISIONAL CROWN AND BRIDGE MATERIAL PIEZOGRAPHIE IN THE SERVICE OF EDENTULOUS: CLINICAL CASE REPORT ASSESSMENT OF MENTAL FORAMEN POSITION IN DENTATE SUBJECTS INFLUENCE OF POST-OPERATIVE INSTRUCTIONS ON WOUND HEALING. A RANDOMIZED, SINGLE-BLINDED CLINICAL TRIAL. COMPARATIVE STUDY ON IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED EXTRACTION OF MANDIBULAR MOLARS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE DENTOALVEOLAR ABSCESS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1