Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fort...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fouad Salama, Hessa Alrejaye, Malak Aldosari, Naif Almosa
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2018-01-01
Series:Journal of Orthodontic Science
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jorthodsci.org/article.asp?issn=2278-0203;year=2018;volume=7;issue=1;spage=12;epage=12;aulast=Salama
_version_ 1818150800475553792
author Fouad Salama
Hessa Alrejaye
Malak Aldosari
Naif Almosa
author_facet Fouad Salama
Hessa Alrejaye
Malak Aldosari
Naif Almosa
author_sort Fouad Salama
collection DOAJ
description OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty premolars were randomly allocated into four groups, 10 teeth/group. New and rebonded brackets were bonded to sound and cleaned enamel surface, and then were subjected to thermocycling. The bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Remaining adhesives on enamel after bracket debonding was scored independently by two investigators who were not aware of the four different groups, using adhesive remnant index (ARI). RESULTS: There was a statistical significant difference in SBS of the four groups (P = 0.005). SBS values were significantly higher with cleaned enamel surfaces after adhesive removal compared to sound enamel. SBS was significantly higher for rebonded brackets, when compared with the new brackets. No significant difference was found between the two adhesives types. The level of agreement between the two raters was higher toward the classification of higher categories of ARI (scores 5 and 6) with agreement percentage 91.7% and 100%, respectively. There was more adhesive remained among resin-composite groups. CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength of debonded sandblasted stainless-steel brackets was higher than new brackets. Resin-composite and RMGI orthodontic adhesives used in this study exhibited sufficient SBS values for bonding brackets to sound and cleaned enamel and comparable to each other.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T13:28:41Z
format Article
id doaj.art-9d71e66fcddc4987904741e68c35e14d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2278-0203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T13:28:41Z
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Journal of Orthodontic Science
spelling doaj.art-9d71e66fcddc4987904741e68c35e14d2022-12-22T01:05:24ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Orthodontic Science2278-02032018-01-0171121210.4103/jos.JOS_158_17Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfacesFouad SalamaHessa AlrejayeMalak AldosariNaif AlmosaOBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of new and rebounded orthodontic brackets bonded to the buccal sound and cleaned enamel surfaces using two orthodontic adhesives: resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) and resin-composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty premolars were randomly allocated into four groups, 10 teeth/group. New and rebonded brackets were bonded to sound and cleaned enamel surface, and then were subjected to thermocycling. The bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Remaining adhesives on enamel after bracket debonding was scored independently by two investigators who were not aware of the four different groups, using adhesive remnant index (ARI). RESULTS: There was a statistical significant difference in SBS of the four groups (P = 0.005). SBS values were significantly higher with cleaned enamel surfaces after adhesive removal compared to sound enamel. SBS was significantly higher for rebonded brackets, when compared with the new brackets. No significant difference was found between the two adhesives types. The level of agreement between the two raters was higher toward the classification of higher categories of ARI (scores 5 and 6) with agreement percentage 91.7% and 100%, respectively. There was more adhesive remained among resin-composite groups. CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength of debonded sandblasted stainless-steel brackets was higher than new brackets. Resin-composite and RMGI orthodontic adhesives used in this study exhibited sufficient SBS values for bonding brackets to sound and cleaned enamel and comparable to each other.http://www.jorthodsci.org/article.asp?issn=2278-0203;year=2018;volume=7;issue=1;spage=12;epage=12;aulast=SalamaBondingorthodontic adhesiveorthodontic bracketsandblastingshear bond strength
spellingShingle Fouad Salama
Hessa Alrejaye
Malak Aldosari
Naif Almosa
Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
Journal of Orthodontic Science
Bonding
orthodontic adhesive
orthodontic bracket
sandblasting
shear bond strength
title Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_full Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_fullStr Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_full_unstemmed Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_short Shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
title_sort shear bond strength of new and rebonded orthodontic brackets to the enamel surfaces
topic Bonding
orthodontic adhesive
orthodontic bracket
sandblasting
shear bond strength
url http://www.jorthodsci.org/article.asp?issn=2278-0203;year=2018;volume=7;issue=1;spage=12;epage=12;aulast=Salama
work_keys_str_mv AT fouadsalama shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT hessaalrejaye shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT malakaldosari shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces
AT naifalmosa shearbondstrengthofnewandrebondedorthodonticbracketstotheenamelsurfaces