Influence of adhesion promoters and curing-light sources on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets
Context: The effect of different curing units on bond strength of orthodontic brackets is still unclear when utilizing nanofilled composites in comparison with traditional Transbond-XT. Aim: To evaluate the influence of two adhesive promoters and two curing-light units on the shear bond strength (SB...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications,
2012-01-01T00:00:00Z.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Connect to this object online. |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Context: The effect of different curing units on bond strength of orthodontic brackets is still unclear when utilizing nanofilled composites in comparison with traditional Transbond-XT. Aim: To evaluate the influence of two adhesive promoters and two curing-light units on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets. Settings and Design: The factors under study were adhesive promoters (nanofilled composite - Filtek-Z350 flowable restorative and conventional orthodontic adhesive - Transbond XT) and curing-light units (halogen lamp - Ultralux and LED device - Radii-Call). Material and Methods: Forty lower bovine incisors were utilized. The teeth were distributed in four groups (n = 10) according to the combination between adhesive promoters and curing-light units. Scotchbond Multipurpose-Plus and Transbond-XT primer were used to bond Filtek-Z350 Flowable Restorative and Transbond-XT, respectively. After storage in distilled water for 24 h, the brackets were subjected to SBS test at a speed of 0.5 mm/min until bracket debonding. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was assigned at fractured specimens. Statistical analysis used: Analysis of variance and Tukey test were utilized. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare ARI scores between the groups (p<0.05). Results: There was statistically significant difference between the adhesive promoters tested. Transbond-XT showed higher SBS means than Filtek-Z350. There was no statistically significant difference between both curing-light units tested in this study, neither between ARI scores. Conclusions: The conventional orthodontic adhesive presented higher bond strength than the nanofilled composite, although both materials interacted similarly to the teeth. The curing-light devices tested did not influence on bond strength of orthodontic brackets. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | 0970-9290 1998-3603 10.4103/0970-9290.111252 |