Bracket Bond Strength Comparison Between New Unfilled Experimental Self-etching Primer Adhesive and Conventional Filled Adhesives

Overview

Journal Angle Orthod

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2010 Aug 4

PMID 20677960

Citations 3

Authors

Masahiro Iijima

Shuichi Ito

Takeshi Muguruma

Takashi Saito

Itaru Mizoguchi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To determine if a new unfilled experimental self-etching primer (SEP) adhesive system (SBP-40TX + C&B Metabond) that incorporates a methyl methacrylate-based 4-META/TBB (4-methacryloxyethyl trimellitate anhydride tri-n-butyl borane) resin can provide adequate shear bond strength (SBS) when used for bonding orthodontic brackets.

Methods And Materials: Forty-eight human maxillary premolars were randomly divided into three groups of 16 specimens each. Brackets were bonded with three bonding systems. A filled Bis-GMA/TEGDM (triethylene glycol dimethacrylate)-based SEP adhesive system (Transbond Plus) and an unfilled conventional etch-and-rinse adhesive system (C&B Metabond) were used for comparison. The SBS for each sample was examined with a universal testing machine, and the Adhesive Remnant Index score was calculated. Enamel surfaces after conditioning were examined using a scanning electron microscope. Data were compared by one-way analysis of variance and a chi(2) test.

Results: The experimental SEP showed a milder etching pattern than Transbond Plus SEP. No statistically significant differences in the mean SBS were found between the specimens bonded with the unfilled experimental SEP adhesive system (10.0 MPa) and the filled SEP adhesive system (8.7 MPa). The unfilled experimental SEP adhesive system showed less residual adhesive than the filled SEP adhesive system.

Conclusions: The unfilled experimental SEP adhesive system showed a clinically sufficient SBS that was equivalent to the filled SEP adhesive system.

Citing Articles

Bracket Bond Failures: Incidence and Association with Different Risk Factors-A Retrospective Study.

Jakavice R, Kubiliute K, Smailiene D Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(5).

PMID: 36901461 PMC: 10002450. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20054452.

Shear Bond Strength of Brackets Bonded with Self-Etching Primers Compared to Conventional Acid-Etch Technique: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Farhadian N, Miresmaeili A, Zandi V Front Dent. 2020; 16(4):248-255.

PMID: 32342053 PMC: 7181350. DOI: 10.18502/fid.v16i4.2083.

Effect of clearfil protect bond and transbond plus self-etch primer on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets.

Raji S, Ghorbanipour R, Majdzade F Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2013; 8(Suppl 1):S94-9.

PMID: 23372605 PMC: 3556285.

References

Bishara S, Ajlouni R, Laffoon J, Warren J . Effect of a fluoride-releasing self-etch acidic primer on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod. 2002; 72(3):199-202. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0199:EOAFRS>2.0.CO;2. View

Ostby A, Bishara S, Laffoon J, Warren J . Influence of self-etchant application time on bracket shear bond strength. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(5):885-9. DOI: 10.2319/092006-383. View

Scougall Vilchis R, Hotta Y, Yamamoto K . Examination of enamel-adhesive interface with focused ion beam and scanning electron microscopy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131(5):646-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.11.017. View

Arhun N, Arman A, Sesen C, Karabulut E, Korkmaz Y, Gokalp S . Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets with 3 self-etch adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129(4):547-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.006. View

Iijima M, Muguruma T, Brantley W, Ito S, Yuasa T, Saito T . Effect of bracket bonding on nanomechanical properties of enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(6):735-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.01.028. View

NEWMAN G . Epoxy adhesives for orthodontic attachments: progress report. Am J Orthod. 1965; 51(12):901-12. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(65)90203-4. View

Fjeld M, Ogaard B . Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of enamel surfaces exposed to 3 orthodontic bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(5):575-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.07.002. View

Iijima M, Ito S, Yuasa T, Muguruma T, Saito T, Mizoguchi I . Bond strength comparison and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of three orthodontic bonding systems. Dent Mater J. 2008; 27(3):392-9. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.27.392. View

Scougall Vilchis R, Yamamoto S, Kitai N, Masato Hotta , Yamamoto K . Shear bond strength of a new fluoride-releasing orthodontic adhesive. Dent Mater J. 2007; 26(1):45-51. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.26.45. View

10.

Cehreli S, Eminkahyagil N . Effect of active pretreatment of self-etching primers on the ultramorphology of intact primary and permanent tooth enamel. J Dent Child (Chic). 2006; 73(2):86-90. View

11.

Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H . Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res. 2004; 83(6):454-8. DOI: 10.1177/154405910408300604. View

12.

Iijima M, Ito S, Yuasa T, Muguruma T, Saito T, Mizoguchi I . Effects of application time and agitation for bonding orthodontic brackets with two self-etching primer systems. Dent Mater J. 2009; 28(1):89-95. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.28.89. View

13.

Velasquez L, Sergent R, Burgess J, Mercante D . Effect of placement agitation and placement time on the shear bond strength of 3 self-etching adhesives. Oper Dent. 2006; 31(4):426-30. DOI: 10.2341/05-52. View

14.

Perdigao J, Gomes G, Lopes M . Influence of conditioning time on enamel adhesion. Quintessence Int. 2006; 37(1):35-41. View

15.

Faltermeier A, Rosentritt M, Faltermeier R, Reicheneder C, Mussig D . Influence of filler level on the bond strength of orthodontic adhesives. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(3):494-8. DOI: 10.2319/0003-3219(2007)077[0494:IOFLOT]2.0.CO;2. View

16.

Pashley D, Tay F . Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. Part II: etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater. 2001; 17(5):430-44. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00104-4. View