Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of different enamel preparation procedures and compare light cure composite (LCC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) on the bond strength of orthodontic metal tubes rebonded to the enamel. Twenty human molars were divided into two groups (n = 10). Tubes were bonded using LCC (Transbond XT) in group 1 and RMGI (Fuji Ortho LC) in group 2. The tubes in each group were bonded following manufacturers' instructions (experiment I) and then debonded using testing machine. Then, the same brackets were sandblasted and rebonded twice. Before the first rebonding, the enamel was cleaned using carbide bur (experiment II) and before second rebonding, it was cleaned using carbide bur and soda blasted (experiment III). Mann–Whitney and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed no significant difference between RMGI and LCC bond strengths in case of normal bonding and rebonding, when enamel was cleaned using carbide bur before rebonding. Enamel soda blasting before rebonding significantly increased RMGI tensile bond strength value compared to LLC (p < 0.05). LCC and RMGI (especially RMGI) provide sufficient bond strengths for rebonding of molar tubes, when residual adhesive from previous bonding is removed and enamel soda blasted.

Highlights

  • The acid-etching bonding technique introduced by Buonocore in 1955 has revolutionized the bonding procedure [1, 2]

  • The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of different enamel preparation procedures and different bonding materials (LCC and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI)) on the bond strength of orthodontic tubes rebonded to the enamel

  • Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess the impact of the molar tube rebonding procedure on its tensile bond strength

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The acid-etching bonding technique introduced by Buonocore in 1955 has revolutionized the bonding procedure [1, 2]. It was adopted for bonding orthodontic brackets clinically by Newman in 1968. The bonding of orthodontic brackets and tubes instead of banding improved treatment results in orthodontics. It resulted in decreased gingival irritation, improved esthetics, easier plaque removal, and elimination of pretreatment separation [3]. Orthodontists use different enamel pretreatment methods such as bur, air abrasion, acid etch treatment, and different adhesive materials [4]. Most of the bonding procedures provide clinically acceptable bond strengths, orthodontic bond failure, especially failure of orthodontic tubes in the molar region, is still a serious problem for clinical orthodontics [5, 6]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call