Literature DB >> 10022184

Bracket bonding with 15- or 60-second etching and adhesive remaining on enamel after debonding.

R Osorio1, M Toledano, F Garcia-Godoy.   

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to (1) evaluate the shear bond strength of brackets fixed to enamel that has been etched for 15 or 60 seconds, (2) correlate etch time with amount of resin remaining on the enamel after debonding; and (3) evaluate enamel morphology after acid etching. Sixty recently extracted human premolars were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 was etched for 15 seconds, and group 2 for 60 seconds. A 37% phosphoric acid solution was used for etching. The brackets were Mini-Taurus, and the bonding system was Mono-Lok2. After bonding, the teeth were held at 37 degrees C and 100% humidity for at least 48 hours. To debond, a blade was placed at the ligature groove of the bracket. The force in Newtons required to dislodge the bracket was measured, employing a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Bond strength was calculated on the basis of bracket area. Immediately after removal of the bracket, the teeth were rinsed and dried using an air-water syringe, and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) was assessed. Enamel surfaces were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The results showed that shear bond strength was greater (p=0.016) when the enamel was etched for 60 seconds, and the amount of adhesive remaining on the teeth was also greater (p=0.001). There was no significant correlation between shear bond strength and the ARI calculated in the total sample (n=60, r=0.017; p>0.05). SEM evaluation revealed that the shorter etching time created a less retentive enamel surface. Absolute enamel loss also decreased.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10022184     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1999)069<0045:BBWOSE>2.3.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  6 in total

1.  Roughness of enamel surfaces after different bonding and debonding procedures : An in vitro study.

Authors:  Lorenz M Brauchli; Eva-Maria Baumgartner; Judith Ball; Andrea Wichelhaus
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Impulse debracketing compared to conventional debonding.

Authors:  Michael Knösel; Simone Mattysek; Klaus Jung; Reza Sadat-Khonsari; Dietmar Kubein-Meesenburg; Oskar Bauss; Dirk Ziebolz
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.079

3.  Fluorescence-Aided Identification Technique (FIT) Improves Tooth Surface Clean-Up after Debonding of Buccal and Lingual Orthodontic Appliances.

Authors:  Olivia Engeler; Oliver Stadler; Simone Horn; Christian Dettwiler; Thomas Connert; Carlalberta Verna; Georgios Kanavakis
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-31       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  Three-dimensional quantitative analysis of adhesive remnants and enamel loss resulting from debonding orthodontic molar tubes.

Authors:  Joanna Janiszewska-Olszowska; Katarzyna Tandecka; Tomasz Szatkiewicz; Katarzyna Sporniak-Tutak; Katarzyna Grocholewicz
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 2.151

5.  Evaluation of bond strength of orthodontic brackets without enamel etching.

Authors:  Alireza Boruziniat; Yegane Khazaei; Shiva Motaghi; Mohmmadjavad Moghaddas
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2015-10-01

6.  Three-dimensional analysis of enamel surface alteration resulting from orthodontic clean-up -comparison of three different tools.

Authors:  Joanna Janiszewska-Olszowska; Katarzyna Tandecka; Tomasz Szatkiewicz; Piotr Stępień; Katarzyna Sporniak-Tutak; Katarzyna Grocholewicz
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 2.757

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.