The effects of application time of a self-etching primer and debonding methods on bracket bond strength

Parrish, Brandon C.; Katona, Thomas R.; Isikbay, Serkis C.; Stewart, Kelton T.; Kula, Katherine

doi:10.2319/020411-82.1

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Higher ARI values are favorable for avoiding damage to the enamel, as the residue may safely be removed with suitable rotary instruments. In the present study there was higher prevalence of ARI 1 (82%) and 2 (13%) values in all groups, thus detecting a failure in the bonding to enamel, or greater retention of the adhesive material to the bracket, as shown in previous studies (1,24).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vitro the shear bond strength to enamel, flexural strength, flexural modulus, and contraction stress of one orthodontic composite and two flowable composites. Orthodontic brackets were bonded to 45 human maxillary premolars with the composites Transbond XT, Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow and tested for shear bond strength. For measurement of flexural strength and flexural modulus, specimens were fabricated and tested under flexion. For the contraction stress test, cylindrical specimens were tested and an extensometer determined the height of the specimens. The data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The shear bond strength values were significantly lower (p<0.05) for the flowable composites compared with the orthodontic composite. For the flexural strength, no statistically significant difference was found among the composites (p>0.05) while the flexural modulus was significantly higher (p<0.05) for Transbond XT than for Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow. The orthodontic composite presented significantly lower contraction stress values than the flowable composites (p<0.05). The light-activated orthodontic composite material presented higher flexural modulus and shear bond strength and lower contraction stress than both flowable composites.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The bonded area established in this experiment was equivalent to one-third of one bracket section. Several researchers have described residual adhesive levels after debracketing, at various bond strengths (20)(21)(22)(23). Rikuta et al (24) reported that an area of more than 50% of the SB, which was used to bond the metal bracket onto the tooth surface in a shear test, occurred in 90% of specimens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of orthodontic adhesive thickness on force required by debonding pliers

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This in vitro study evaluated the relationship between removal force and the thickness of three orthodontic adhesives, namely, light-and chemical-cured resin cements and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement. The thickness of each adhesive was 50, 100, 150, or 200 µm, and all adhesives were bonded on bovine incisors. Removal force was measured before (TC-0) and after 1,000 thermal cycles (TC-1000), and values were compared. At TC-0, the removal strengths for adhesive thicknesses of 50 and 100 µm were significantly lower than those for thicknesses of 150 and 200 µm (P < 0.05). At TC-1000, removal strengths for adhesive thicknesses of 50 and 100 µm were also significantly lower than those for 150 and 200 µm. Superbond Orthomite specimens showed a significant difference in removal strength between TC-0 and TC-1000 (P < 0.05) at all thicknesses. There was no significant difference in the distribution of adhesive remnant index scores at any thickness. These findings indicate that decreasing the thickness of applied orthodontic adhesive reduces the removal strength required. (J Oral Sci 56, [185][186][187][188][189][190] 2014)

show abstract

“…Hence, as an orthodontist, we try to find the method which is least painful at debonding stage. Hence, the purpose of the study became to evaluate the best method among the methods which are commonly used for debonding [14,15] determining patients discomfort and amount of adhesive remaining on the enamel surface which, in turn, affects potential enamel damage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Different Methods after Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: An In Vivo Study

Yadav¹

2019

IJDMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study aims to evaluate and compare the discomfort levels during debonding using different three methods and adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores compared. Materials and Methods: Sample comprised 50 female patients from single clinic of an average age of 24 years and 5 months. Three methods used were lift-off debonding instrument (LODI), straight cutter, and Howe plier. At the end of debonding in each quadrant, discomfort levels were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS). Remaining adhesive on enamel surface was studied with the help of ARI. Results: Pain scores were significantly higher for SC method. LODI group showed least discomfort. ARI showed significantly different results with three methods used. Conclusion: Patients showed least discomfort when LODI method was used.

show abstract

The effects of application time of a self-etching primer and debonding methods on bracket bond strength

Cited by 12 publications

References 35 publications

Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

Effect of orthodontic adhesive thickness on force required by debonding pliers

Feasibility of Different Methods after Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: An In Vivo Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About