» Articles » PMID: 34206852

Surface Characteristics, Fluoride Release and Bond Strength Evaluation of Four Orthodontic Adhesives

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2021 Jul 2
PMID 34206852
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Orthodontic adhesives have similar properties in terms of fluoride release, roughness, shear bond strength or cement debris for specific clinical conditions. Three commercial consecrated orthodontic adhesives (Opal Seal, Blugloo, Light Bond) were compared with an experimental orthodontic material (C1). Brackets were bonded to enamel using a self-etch technique followed by adhesive application and then de-bonded 60 days later. Share bond strength evaluation, scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy and fluoride release analysis were performed. The highest amount of daily and cumulative fluoride release was obtained for the experimental material, while the lowest value was observed for Opal Seal. The materials evaluated in the current study presented adequate shear bond strength, with the experimental material having a mean value higher than Opal Seal and Blugloo. The atomic force microscopy measurements indicated that the smoothest initial sample is Opal Seal followed by Light Bond. Scanning electron microscopy evaluation indicated different aspects of cement debris on the enamel and/or bracket surface, according to the type of adhesive. The experimental material C1 presented adequate properties in terms of shear bond strength, fluoride release, roughness and enamel characteristics after de-bonding, compared to the commercial materials. Under these circumstances, it can be considered for clinical testing.

Citing Articles

Fluoridated orthodontic adhesives: Implications of release and recharge and their impact on shear bond strength in demineralized tooth surfaces.

Yaseen M, Agha N, Jasim R J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2023; 17(3):142-148.

PMID: 38023799 PMC: 10676534. DOI: 10.34172/joddd.2023.40594.


Mechanical Properties of Orthodontic Cements and Their Behavior in Acidic Environments.

Iosif C, Cuc S, Prodan D, Moldovan M, Petean I, Labunet A Materials (Basel). 2022; 15(22).

PMID: 36431389 PMC: 9697370. DOI: 10.3390/ma15227904.


Human Enamel Fluorination Enhancement by Photodynamic Laser Treatment.

Tisler C, Moldovan M, Petean I, Buduru S, Prodan D, Sarosi C Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(14).

PMID: 35890745 PMC: 9325182. DOI: 10.3390/polym14142969.


Assessment of Microstructure and Release of Fluoride Ions from Selected Fissure Sealants: An In Vitro Study.

Fita K, Dobrzynski M, Zietek M, Diakowska D, Watras A, Wiglusz R Materials (Basel). 2021; 14(17).

PMID: 34501026 PMC: 8433992. DOI: 10.3390/ma14174936.

References
1.
Fan X, Chen L, Huang X . Effects of various debonding and adhesive clearance methods on enamel surface: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017; 17(1):58. PMC: 5327509. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0349-6. View

2.
Can-Karabulut D, Batmaz I, Solak H, Tastekin M . Linear regression modeling to compare fluoride release profiles of various restorative materials. Dent Mater. 2006; 23(9):1057-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.046. View

3.
Banks P, Elton V, Jones Y, Rice P, Derwent S, Odondi L . The use of fixed appliances in the UK: a survey of specialist orthodontists. J Orthod. 2010; 37(1):43-55. DOI: 10.1179/14653121042867. View

4.
Hellwig E, Lussi A . What is the optimum fluoride concentration needed for the remineralization process?. Caries Res. 2001; 35 Suppl 1:57-9. DOI: 10.1159/000049112. View

5.
Pinho M, Manso M, Faria Almeida R, Martin C, Carvalho O, Henriques B . Bond Strength of Metallic or Ceramic Orthodontic Brackets to Enamel, Acrylic, or Porcelain Surfaces. Materials (Basel). 2020; 13(22). PMC: 7698487. DOI: 10.3390/ma13225197. View