COMPARISON OF LIGHT-CURING TIME WITH THE USE OF DIFFERENT LED INTENSITIES IN THE BONDING OF ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS

Bruno Mafra Ceribelli, Paula Cotrin, Rodrigo Hermont Cançado, Fabrício Pinelli Valarelli, Karina Maria Salvatore de Freitas
{"title":"COMPARISON OF LIGHT-CURING TIME WITH THE USE OF DIFFERENT LED INTENSITIES IN THE BONDING OF ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS","authors":"Bruno Mafra Ceribelli, Paula Cotrin, Rodrigo Hermont Cançado, Fabrício Pinelli Valarelli, Karina Maria Salvatore de Freitas","doi":"10.9771/cmbio.v23i1.53194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the shear bond strength of metallic brackets after orthodontic bonding using conventional and high-intensity light curing devices. \nMethods: Eighty bovine central incisors were randomly divided into four groups according to curing time and LED devices: G1- Use of conventional LED LCU curing for 20 seconds (Emitter D - Wireless, Schuster, Brazil); G2-  High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Valo Cordless, Ultradent Products, USA); G3- High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Flash Max P4 Ortho Pro, CMS Dental A / S, Denmark) and G4 - High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (LEDX-T 2400 Orthometric, Brazil). Twenty-four hours after bonding, brackets were subjected to a universal testing machine with a shear bond strength (SBS) test. The Enamel surface was visually evaluated with the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). The one-way ANOVA was performed to compare the SBS between the different light-curing devices. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was compared with the chi-square test. \nResults: There were no significant differences between the groups (p = 0.767). The analysis of the adhesive remnant index also showed no statistically significant differences between the groups. \nConclusion: There was no difference in the shear bond strength and ARI index with a curing time of 3 seconds in high-intensity LCU and 20 seconds in conventional LCU.","PeriodicalId":21339,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Ciências Médicas e Biológicas","volume":"44 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Ciências Médicas e Biológicas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9771/cmbio.v23i1.53194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the shear bond strength of metallic brackets after orthodontic bonding using conventional and high-intensity light curing devices. Methods: Eighty bovine central incisors were randomly divided into four groups according to curing time and LED devices: G1- Use of conventional LED LCU curing for 20 seconds (Emitter D - Wireless, Schuster, Brazil); G2-  High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Valo Cordless, Ultradent Products, USA); G3- High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Flash Max P4 Ortho Pro, CMS Dental A / S, Denmark) and G4 - High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (LEDX-T 2400 Orthometric, Brazil). Twenty-four hours after bonding, brackets were subjected to a universal testing machine with a shear bond strength (SBS) test. The Enamel surface was visually evaluated with the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). The one-way ANOVA was performed to compare the SBS between the different light-curing devices. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was compared with the chi-square test. Results: There were no significant differences between the groups (p = 0.767). The analysis of the adhesive remnant index also showed no statistically significant differences between the groups. Conclusion: There was no difference in the shear bond strength and ARI index with a curing time of 3 seconds in high-intensity LCU and 20 seconds in conventional LCU.
在粘接正畸托槽时使用不同强度 LED 的光固化时间比较
目的比较使用传统光固化设备和高强度光固化设备进行正畸粘接后金属托槽的剪切粘接强度。方法根据固化时间和 LED 设备将 80 颗牛中切牙随机分为四组:G1- 使用传统 LED LCU 固化 20 秒(Emitter D - Wireless,Schuster,巴西);G2- 高强度 LED LCU 固化 3 秒(Valo Cordless,Ultradent Products,美国);G3- 高强度 LED LCU 固化 3 秒(Flash Max P4 Ortho Pro,CMS Dental A/S,丹麦);G4- 高强度 LED LCU 固化 3 秒(LEDX-T 2400 Orthometric,巴西)。粘接 24 小时后,在万能试验机上对托槽进行剪切粘接强度(SBS)测试。用粘合剂残留指数(ARI)对珐琅质表面进行目测评估。对不同光固化设备的 SBS 进行单因素方差分析比较。粘合剂残留指数(ARI)采用卡方检验进行比较。结果显示各组之间无明显差异(P = 0.767)。对残余粘合指数的分析表明,各组之间也没有明显的统计学差异。结论在高强度 LCU 固化时间为 3 秒和传统 LCU 固化时间为 20 秒的情况下,剪切粘接强度和 ARI 指数没有差异。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信