Literature DB >> 12532057

In vitro comparison of orthodontic band cements.

Declan T Millett1, Sheena Duff, Lynsey Morrison, Alistair Cummings, W Harper Gilmour.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the mean retentive strength of microetched orthodontic bands cemented to extracted human third molars with a modified composite, a resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and a conventional glass ionomer cement. The mode of band failure and amount of cement remaining on the tooth at deband were also assessed. Finally, survival time of bands with each cement was assessed with simulated mechanical stress in a ball mill. Ninety banded specimens were used to assess retentive strength, and another 30 banded specimens were used to assess survival time. The mean retentive strength of the modified composite (0.415 MPa) was significantly less than that of either the resin-modified (1.715 MPa) or the conventional glass ionomer cement (1.454 MPa; P <.001). Specimens failed predominantly at the cement-enamel interface. The amount of cement remaining on the tooth at deband differed significantly between bands cemented with the resin-modified cement and those cemented with the conventional glass ionomer cement (P <.05). Mean survival time of bands cemented with the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (14.3 hours) was significantly longer (P <.01) than for bands cemented with the conventional glass ionomer cement (9.9 hours) but did not differ significantly from that of bands cemented with the modified composite (11.1 hours; P >.05). Orthodontic bands cemented with the modified composite appear to have a significantly lower mean retentive strength than bands cemented with resin-modified or conventional glass ionomer cement, but mean survival time did not differ significantly for bands cemented with modified composite or resin-modified glass ionomer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12532057     DOI: 10.1067/mod.2003.48

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of Shear Peel Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Cements Used for Fixed Space Maintainer Cementation: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Jasmeet Kaur; Amitoj Singh; Gunmeen Sadana; Manjul Mehra; Mamta Mahajan
Journal:  Int J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr

2.  Can we add chlorhexidine into glass ionomer cements for band cementation?

Authors:  Marcel M Farret; Eduardo Martinelli de Lima; Eduardo G Mota; Hugo M S Oshima; Valdir Barth; Silvia D de Oliveira
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-02-07       Impact factor: 2.079

3.  Antibacterial and mechanical properties of propolis added to glass ionomer cement.

Authors:  Erdem Hatunoğlu; Fırat Oztürk; Tuğça Bilenler; Sertaç Aksakallı; Neslihan Simşek
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Orthodontic cements and demineralization: an in vitro comparative scanning electron microscope study.

Authors:  V Prabhavathi; Josy Jacob; M Shashi Kiran; Murugesan Ramakrishnan; Esha Sethi; C S Krishnan
Journal:  J Int Oral Health       Date:  2015-02

5.  Retentive Strength of Orthodontic Bands Cemented with Amorphous Calcium Phosphate-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement: An In-Vitro Study.

Authors:  Farzin Heravi; Maryam Omidkhoda; Niloufar Koohestanian; Tabassom Hooshmand; Hossein Bagheri; Negin Ghaffari
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2017-01

6.  In vitro bond strength and fatigue stress test evaluation of different adhesive cements used for fixed space maintainer cementation.

Authors:  Kenan Cantekin; Ebru Delikan; Secil Cetin
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2014-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.