Abstract
To evaluate the bond efficacy and failure rates of rebonded metallic brackets after enamel reconditioning with chemical 37% phosphoric acid (PA) and natural and synthetic photosensitizers activated by PDT. A total of 50 non-cavitated, and cautiously extracted human premolars were congregated after sample size calculation. The enamel exterior was etched, washed, dried for adhesive application, and cured. Metallic brackets were then oriented and adapted to enamel surface using composite. Later, brackets were debonded from the surface via a Weingart plier. Enamel was finished for ensuing surface reconditioning. Ultimately, specimens were randomly distributed into five groups (n=10). Enamel surface before rebonding was reconditioned with curcumin photosensitizer (CP), riboflavin photosensitizer (RP), rose bengal photosensitizer (RBP), methylene blue photosensitizer (MBP), and 37% PA (control) respectively. After following reconditioning protocol, brackets were rebonded to the enamel exterior employing a composite adhesive system. Then, specimens were subjected to the universal testing machine for analyzing shear bond strength (SBS), and bond failures were predicted using an ARI index. One-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparison tests were used for statistical analysis at a variance value of p < 0.05. Enamel reconditioned with 37% PA demonstrated the highest SBS for bracket rebonding, and the lowest SBS was presented by CP actuated by PDT. Enamel reconditioned with RP and RBP corroborated the analogous SBS outcome to 37% PA. Likewise, enamel surface treatment with MBP revealed a statistically significant result to CP for metallic bracket rebonding. The most prevalent failure scores anticipated among groups were 0 and 1 indicating an adhesive failure with the exemption of group 5 (control) that encountered more score 2 cohesive failure on debonding metallic brackets from enamel exterior. Rose bengal and riboflavin photosensitizers activated by photodynamic therapy with low ARI scores have the potential to be used as viable enamel reconditioning alternatives to 37% phosphoric acid for rebonding metallic brackets.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: European review for medical and pharmacological sciences
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.