Fatigue resistance, debonding force, and failure type of fiber-reinforced composite, polyethylene ribbon-reinforced, and braided stainless steel wire lingual retainersin vitro

Abstract

ObjectiveTo analyze the fatigue resistance, debonding force, and failure type of fiber-reinforced composite, polyethylene ribbon-reinforced, and braided stainless steel wire lingual retainers in vitro.MethodsRoots of human mandibular central incisors were covered with silicone, mimicking the periodontal ligament, and embedded in polymethylmethacrylate. The specimens (N = 50), with two teeth each, were randomly divided into five groups (n = 10/group) according to the retainer materials: (1) Interlig (E-glass), (2) everStick Ortho (E-glass), (3) DentaPreg Splint (S2-glass), (4) Ribbond (polyethylene), and (5) Quad Cat wire (stainless steel). After the recommended adhesive procedures, the retainers were bonded to the teeth by using flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow). The teeth were subjected to 10,00,000 cyclic loads (8 Hz, 3 - 100 N, 45° angle, under 37 ± 3℃ water) at their incisoproximal contact, and debonding forces were measured with a universal testing machine (1 mm/min crosshead speed). Failure sites were examined under a stereomicroscope (×40 magnification). Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance.ResultsAll the specimens survived the cyclic loading. Their mean debonding forces were not significantly different (p > 0.05). The DentaPreg Splint group (80%) showed the highest incidence of complete adhesive debonding, followed by the Interlig group (60%). The everStick Ortho group (80%) presented predominantly partial adhesive debonding. The Quad Cat wire group (50%) presented overlying composite detachment.ConclusionsCyclic loading did not cause debonding. The retainers presented similar debonding forces but different failure types. Braided stainless steel wire retainers presented the most repairable failure type.

Spot-Bonding and Full-Bonding Techniques for Fiber Reinforced Composite (FRC) and Metallic Retainers

“…Bond strengths of full-bonded FRCs have been reported both for new [ 38 ] and repaired [ 39 ] fibers. Also, the influence of different adhesive systems [ 40 ] and polymerization methods [ 41 ] has been tested.…”

Comparative Evaluation of Flexural Strength and Flexural Modulus of Different Periodontal Splint Materials: An In Vitro Study

“…The higher flexibility of polyethylene as compared to the glass fiber and composite could be credited to its patented lock stitch pattern that avoids transfer of stress back into the reinforcement resin and distributes them into the weave [31]. Whereas, less flexibility of glass fiber reinforced composite may be because of resin pre-impregnation of the fibers [32]. While comparing flexural modulus, the highest was reported by Ribbond ® , with composite with ligature wire having the least value.…”

Natural Tooth Pontic Using Recent Adhesive Technologies: An Esthetic and Minimally Invasive Prosthetic Solution

“…Foek et al, specimens of the braided stainless steel wire group frequently failed at the composite-wire interface; on the other hand, the debonding forces were statistically similar to the nonmetal retainers [33]. Ribbond® retainers presented adhesive failure and material breakage in 50% and 40% of the specimens, respectively [33]. Resin adhesion to polyethylene FRCs might be less favorable because of the difficulty in plasma coating, silanization, and impregnation of the polyethylene fibers; such combinations of failure types may not cause direct enamel damage but will necessitate removal of the attached retainers and renewal of the bonding procedure [33].…”

“…Foek et al, specimens of the braided stainless steel wire group frequently failed at the composite-wire interface; on the other hand, the debonding forces were statistically similar to the nonmetal retainers [33]. Ribbond® retainers presented adhesive failure and material breakage in 50% and 40% of the specimens, respectively [33].…”

“…Ribbond® retainers presented adhesive failure and material breakage in 50% and 40% of the specimens, respectively [33]. Resin adhesion to polyethylene FRCs might be less favorable because of the difficulty in plasma coating, silanization, and impregnation of the polyethylene fibers; such combinations of failure types may not cause direct enamel damage but will necessitate removal of the attached retainers and renewal of the bonding procedure [33]. Insights regarding the biomechanical behavior of teeth splinted using different materials have been also reported: according to Soares et al, periodontal splints with composite and adhesive systems were more effective than a rigid fixation method (stainless steel wire) in reducing the mandibular bone strain levels during occlusal function [32].…”