Shear bond strength in two types of indirect orthodontic cementation.

Q2 Dentistry
Arnaldo-Alfredo Munive-Mendez, Rafael Morales-Vadillo, Janet-Ofelia Guevara-Canales
{"title":"Shear bond strength in two types of indirect orthodontic cementation.","authors":"Arnaldo-Alfredo Munive-Mendez, Rafael Morales-Vadillo, Janet-Ofelia Guevara-Canales","doi":"10.4317/jced.61800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the shear bond strength of brackets cemented to dental enamel according to the cementation techniques.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Experimental study. We used 90 premolars and placed them in printed polylactic acid (PLA) filament models to simulate the dental arch shape and to then cement brackets using the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem®. Then, we carried out a shear bond strength test using a universal testing machine, and we evaluated the enamel surface using the adhesive resin remaining index. Dunn's test was used for the inferential statistical analysis of shear bond strength, and Fisher's exact test was used for the adhesive resin remaining index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The shear bond strength of the brackets recorded mean values of 16.74±4.48Mpa, 15.93±6.49Mpa and 12.09±5.07Mpa in the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem® respectively. At an inferential level, a lower statistically significant difference was found in the indirect group with OrthoCem® in contrast to the other two groups. In the evaluation of resin remaining after detachment, the direct technique group registered 46.7% of teeth with more than half of resin remaining and the indirect technique groups with Transbond™XT and Orthocem® registered less than half of resin remaining with an incidence of 53.3% and 43.3% respectively. At an inferential level, a statistically significant difference between groups was evidenced.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The indirect cementation technique using Transbond™ XT is more recommended since it presents a higher shear bond strength than using Orthocem®. <b>Key words:</b>Orthodontics, Adhesion, orthodontic adhesives, shear bond strength.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"16 8","pages":"e953-e960"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11392446/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61800","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To compare the shear bond strength of brackets cemented to dental enamel according to the cementation techniques.

Material and methods: Experimental study. We used 90 premolars and placed them in printed polylactic acid (PLA) filament models to simulate the dental arch shape and to then cement brackets using the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem®. Then, we carried out a shear bond strength test using a universal testing machine, and we evaluated the enamel surface using the adhesive resin remaining index. Dunn's test was used for the inferential statistical analysis of shear bond strength, and Fisher's exact test was used for the adhesive resin remaining index.

Results: The shear bond strength of the brackets recorded mean values of 16.74±4.48Mpa, 15.93±6.49Mpa and 12.09±5.07Mpa in the direct, indirect technique with Transbond™XT and indirect technique with Orthocem® respectively. At an inferential level, a lower statistically significant difference was found in the indirect group with OrthoCem® in contrast to the other two groups. In the evaluation of resin remaining after detachment, the direct technique group registered 46.7% of teeth with more than half of resin remaining and the indirect technique groups with Transbond™XT and Orthocem® registered less than half of resin remaining with an incidence of 53.3% and 43.3% respectively. At an inferential level, a statistically significant difference between groups was evidenced.

Conclusions: The indirect cementation technique using Transbond™ XT is more recommended since it presents a higher shear bond strength than using Orthocem®. Key words:Orthodontics, Adhesion, orthodontic adhesives, shear bond strength.

两种间接正畸粘结剂的剪切粘结强度。
背景:比较不同粘接技术的托槽与牙釉质的剪切粘接强度:实验研究。我们使用了 90 颗前臼齿,并将其放入打印的聚乳酸(PLA)丝模型中模拟牙弓形状,然后使用 Transbond™XT 直接、间接技术和 Orthocem® 间接技术粘接托槽。然后,我们使用万能试验机进行了剪切粘接强度测试,并使用粘接树脂剩余指数对珐琅质表面进行了评估。剪切粘接强度的推理统计分析采用邓恩检验,粘接树脂剩余指数的推理统计分析采用费雪精确检验:结果:托槽的剪切粘接强度在直接技术、Transbond™XT 间接技术和 Orthocem® 间接技术中的平均值分别为 16.74±4.48MPa、15.93±6.49MPa 和 12.09±5.07MPa。在推论层面上,使用 OrthoCem® 的间接组与其他两组相比,在统计意义上的差异较小。在脱离后树脂残留量的评估中,直接技术组有 46.7% 的牙齿树脂残留量超过一半,而使用 Transbond™XT 和 Orthocem® 的间接技术组的树脂残留量不到一半,分别为 53.3% 和 43.3%。在推论层面上,组间差异具有统计学意义:结论:使用 Transbond™ XT 的间接粘接技术比使用 Orthocem® 的剪切粘接强度更高,因此更值得推荐。关键词:正畸 粘接 正畸粘接剂 剪切粘接强度
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery
×
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