An Shear Bond Strength Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Moisture-Insensitive Primer

Overview

Journal J Pharm Bioallied Sci

Specialty Pharmacology

Date 2022 Sep 16

PMID 36110695

Authors

Manjith Rajan

Jayarama Mailankody

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Aims: We aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of moisture-insensitive primer (MIP) Transbond MIP while bonding to wet enamel surface.

Materials And Methods: This study was done on 100 freshly extracted human premolar teeth, collected from the Department of Oral Surgery, Government Dental College, Calicut. They were stored in distilled water at room temperature. All teeth were healthy and without caries lesion, no evidence of surface defects, or any developmental morphological aberrations. Teeth were divided into 5 groups of twenty each for the testing and Brackets were bonded onto the tooth surface in 5 different bonding sequences using Transbond XT and Transbond MIP..

Results: All the three groups of MIP have gained statistically significant higher SBS compared to Group I (Transbond XT primer in wet). Marked decrease in SBS of Transbond XT resin in wet environment was deduced. MIP in repriming sequence (Group IV) is found to have higher bond strength than other MIP groups.

Conclusions: Clinical acceptability of Transbond MIP in wet environment could be recommended. MIP repriming should be done in cases where there is a doubt of contamination with saliva after initial primer application.

References

Fox N, McCabe J, Buckley J . A critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1994; 21(1):33-43. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.21.1.33. View

Silverstone L, Hicks M, Featherstone M . Oral fluid contamination of etched enamel surfaces: an SEM study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1985; 110(3):329-32. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1985.0350. View

Wang W, Lu T . Bond strength with various etching times on young permanent teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991; 100(1):72-9. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(91)70052-X. View

Mavropoulos A, Karamouzos A, Kolokithas G, Athanasiou A . In vivo evaluation of two new moisture-resistant orthodontic adhesive systems: a comparative clinical trial. J Orthod. 2003; 30(2):139-47; discussion 127-8. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/30.2.139. View

Littlewood S, Mitchell L, Greenwood D, Bubb N, Wood D . Investigation of a hydrophilic primer for orthodontic bonding: an in vitro study. J Orthod. 2000; 27(2):181-6. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/27.2.181. View

Prasad M, Mohamed S, Nayak K, Shetty S, Talapaneni A . Effect of moisture, saliva, and blood contamination on the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with a conventional bonding system and self-etched bonding system. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2014; 5(1):123-9. PMC: 3961916. DOI: 10.4103/0976-9668.127305. 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

BUONOCORE M . A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res. 1955; 34(6):849-53. DOI: 10.1177/00220345550340060801. View

Kinch A, Taylor H, Warltier R, Oliver R, Newcombe R . A clinical study of amount of adhesive remaining on enamel after debonding, comparing etch times of 15 and 60 seconds. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989; 95(5):415-21. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90303-x. View

10.

Webster M, NANDA R, Duncanson Jr M, Khajotia S, Sinha P . The effect of saliva on shear bond strengths of hydrophilic bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119(1):54-8. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.109888. View

11.

Grandhi R, Combe E, Speidel T . Shear bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets with a moisture-insensitive primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119(3):251-5. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.110988. View

12.

Rajagopal R, Padmanabhan S, Gnanamani J . A comparison of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics of conventional, moisture-insensitive, and self-etching primers in vitro. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74(2):264-8. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0264:ACOSBS>2.0.CO;2. View

13.

Hormati A, Fuller J, Denehy G . Effects of contamination and mechanical disturbance on the quality of acid-etched enamel. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980; 100(1):34-8. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1980.0033. View

14.

Schaneveldt S, Foley T . Bond strength comparison of moisture-insensitive primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 122(3):267-73. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.126594. View

15.

Littlewood S, Mitchell L, Greenwood D . A randomized controlled trial to investigate brackets bonded with a hydrophilic primer. J Orthod. 2001; 28(4):301-5. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/28.4.301. View

16.

Zeppieri I, Chung C, Mante F . Effect of saliva on shear bond strength of an orthodontic adhesive used with moisture-insensitive and self-etching primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124(4):414-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00405-0. View

17.

Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini M, Scribante A, De Angelis M, Klersy C . Effects of blood contamination on the shear bond strengths of conventional and hydrophilic primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126(2):207-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.06.022. View

18.

Hobson R, Ledvinka J, Meechan J . The effect of moisture and blood contamination on bond strength of a new orthodontic bonding material. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 120(1):54-7. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.115037. View