Scanning electron microscopy analysis of metallic and aesthetic bracket meshes before and after debonding.

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Korean Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2025-01-25 Epub Date: 2024-10-11 DOI:10.4041/kjod24.073

Jacqueline Adelina Rodríguez-Chávez, Hugo Marcelo Flores-Ruiz, Abigailt Flores-Ledesma, Alvaro García-Pérez, Lourdes Bazán-Diaz

{"title":"Scanning electron microscopy analysis of metallic and aesthetic bracket meshes before and after debonding.","authors":"Jacqueline Adelina Rodríguez-Chávez, Hugo Marcelo Flores-Ruiz, Abigailt Flores-Ledesma, Alvaro García-Pérez, Lourdes Bazán-Diaz","doi":"10.4041/kjod24.073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To study the influence of bracket base meshes on shear bond strength and observe them using a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after debonding.Methods: Ninety brackets were divided into nine groups of 10 samples each: G1-Alexander, G2-Mini Sprint® Brackets, G3-In-Ovation R CCO, G4-Gemini SL Self-Ligating Bracket, G5-Classic mini 2G Stylus®, G6-Gemini Metal Brackets, G7-ClarityTM Advanced, G8-Crystall-Ize®, and G9-Ceramic Series Flexx 2G®. Groups G1 to G6 and G7 to G9 consisted of metallic and aesthetic brackets, respectively. Initial photographs of all brackets were taken through SEM at 25X magnification. The brackets were then bonded to premolars using TransbondTM XT, and a shear bond strength test was conducted after 24 hours using an Instron machine at 1 mm/min. After debonding, the bracket meshes were observed using SEM.Results: Before bonding, 72.22% of brackets didn't present mesh defects, while 27.77% did. SEM analysis revealed that G4 and G5 presented defects in 100%, G7 in 40%, and G8 in 10%. The average shear bond strength of 9.67 ± 2.84 MPa and 11.21 ± 4.99 MPa were obtained for both metallic and aesthetic brackets, respectively. A Pairwise-Wilcoxon test with Benjamini-Hochberg correction was conducted to determine specific statistical differences between the groups, revealing significant differences based on bracket type and shear bond strength (P < 0.009).Conclusions: This study suggested that the shape of bracket meshes influenced shear bond strength.","PeriodicalId":51260,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"55 1","pages":"15-25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11788184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod24.073","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To study the influence of bracket base meshes on shear bond strength and observe them using a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after debonding.

Methods: Ninety brackets were divided into nine groups of 10 samples each: G1-Alexander, G2-Mini Sprint^® Brackets, G3-In-Ovation R CCO, G4-Gemini SL Self-Ligating Bracket, G5-Classic mini 2G Stylus^®, G6-Gemini Metal Brackets, G7-Clarity^TM Advanced, G8-Crystall-Ize^®, and G9-Ceramic Series Flexx 2G^®. Groups G1 to G6 and G7 to G9 consisted of metallic and aesthetic brackets, respectively. Initial photographs of all brackets were taken through SEM at 25X magnification. The brackets were then bonded to premolars using Transbond^TM XT, and a shear bond strength test was conducted after 24 hours using an Instron machine at 1 mm/min. After debonding, the bracket meshes were observed using SEM.

Results: Before bonding, 72.22% of brackets didn't present mesh defects, while 27.77% did. SEM analysis revealed that G4 and G5 presented defects in 100%, G7 in 40%, and G8 in 10%. The average shear bond strength of 9.67 ± 2.84 MPa and 11.21 ± 4.99 MPa were obtained for both metallic and aesthetic brackets, respectively. A Pairwise-Wilcoxon test with Benjamini-Hochberg correction was conducted to determine specific statistical differences between the groups, revealing significant differences based on bracket type and shear bond strength (P < 0.009).

Conclusions: This study suggested that the shape of bracket meshes influenced shear bond strength.

查看原文本刊更多论文

金属和美学支架网格脱粘前后的扫描电镜分析。

目的：研究托槽基网对剪切结合强度的影响，并通过扫描电镜观察托槽基网对剪切结合强度的影响。方法：90个托架分为G1-Alexander、G2-Mini Sprint®托架、G3-In-Ovation R CCO、G4-Gemini SL自结扎托架、G5-Classic mini 2G Stylus®、G6-Gemini Metal托架、G7-ClarityTM Advanced、G8-Crystall-Ize®和G9-Ceramic Series Flexx 2G®9组，每组10个样品。G1至G6组和G7至G9组分别由金属和美学支架组成。所有支架的初始照片都是通过25倍放大的扫描电镜拍摄的。然后使用TransbondTM XT将托槽粘接到前磨牙上，并在24小时后使用Instron机器以1 mm/min的速度进行剪切粘接强度测试。脱粘后，用扫描电镜观察支架网格。结果：粘接前，72.22%的托槽不存在补片缺陷，27.77%的托槽存在补片缺陷。SEM分析显示G4和G5的缺陷率为100%，G7为40%，G8为10%。金属托架和美学托架的平均抗剪强度分别为9.67±2.84 MPa和11.21±4.99 MPa。采用Benjamini-Hochberg校正的Pairwise-Wilcoxon检验来确定组间的具体统计差异，结果显示支架类型和剪切粘结强度存在显著差异（P < 0.009）。结论：本研究提示托槽网的形状影响剪切粘结强度。

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

Korean Journal of Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

10.50%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Korean Journal of Orthodontics (KJO) is an international, open access, peer reviewed journal published in January, March, May, July, September, and November each year. It was first launched in 1970 and, as the official scientific publication of Korean Association of Orthodontists, KJO aims to publish high quality clinical and scientific original research papers in all areas related to orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Specifically, its interest focuses on evidence-based investigations of contemporary diagnostic procedures and treatment techniques, expanding to significant clinical reports of diverse treatment approaches. The scope of KJO covers all areas of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics including successful diagnostic procedures and treatment planning, growth and development of the face and its clinical implications, appliance designs, biomechanics, TMJ disorders and adult treatment. Specifically, its latest interest focuses on skeletal anchorage devices, orthodontic appliance and biomaterials, 3 dimensional imaging techniques utilized for dentofacial diagnosis and treatment planning, and orthognathic surgery to correct skeletal disharmony in association of orthodontic treatment.