Literature DB >> 14718881

Bond strength of various bracket base designs.

Wei Nan Wang1, Chung Hsing Li, Ta Hsiung Chou, Dennis Ding Hwa Wang, Li Hsiang Lin, Che Tong Lin.   

Abstract

To determine the influence of various bracket base designs on bond strength and debond interface, 6 types of metal interlock brackets of different sizes and with different base designs were evaluated. The bracket base types and mesh sizes tested were as follows: retention groove base (Dynalock, Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), circular concave base (Accuarch appliance Formula-R, Tomy, Tokyo, Japan), double mesh with 5.1 x 10(-2) mm2 mesh size (Ultratrimm, Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany), double mesh, 3.1 x 10(-2) mm2 (Minidiagonali Roth, Leone, Florence, Italy), double mesh, 3.1 x 10(-2) mm2 (Tip-edge Rx-I, TP Orthodontics, LaPorte Ind), and double mesh, 2.9 x 10(-2) mm2 (Mini Diamond, Ormco, Glendora, Calif). The Unitek bracket is cast in 1 piece; the other brackets are welded together. Brackets were bonded to human teeth and then debonded on a testing machine. The debond interface was recorded and analyzed with scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive x-ray spectrometry, and the distribution of interfaces was determined. The ranking of bond strength of individual bases (kg/base) from highest to lowest was Tomy, Dentaurum, Unitek, Leone, TP Orthodontics, and Ormco. The ranking of bonding strength per area squared MPa from highest to lowest was Tomy, Dentaurum, Leone, Unitek, TP Orthodontics, and Ormco. Debond in interfaces occurred between the bracket and resin, within the resin, or between the resin and enamel. The most debonded interfaces were between the bracket and resin and between the resin and enamel. The Tomy bracket, with its circular concave base, produced greater bond strength than did the mesh-based brackets; among the mesh-based brackets, Dentaurum, with the larger mesh size, produced greater bond strength than the brackets with smaller mesh sizes. The Unitek bracket, with its 1-piece cast base with retention grooves, ranked in the midrange of bond strength.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14718881     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.01.003

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


  11 in total

1.  Finite element study on modification of bracket base and its effects on bond strength.

Authors:  Tarulatha R Shyagali; Deepak P Bhayya; Chandralekha B Urs; Shashikala Subramaniam
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr

2.  Effect of bracket base design on shear bond strength to feldspathic porcelain.

Authors:  Kazem Dalaie; Armin Mirfasihi; Solmaz Eskandarion; Sattar Kabiri
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep

3.  In vitro analysis of shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index of different metal brackets.

Authors:  Fernanda de Souza Henkin; Érika de Oliveira Dias de Macêdo; Karoline da Silva Santos; Marília Schwarzbach; Susana Maria Werner Samuel; Karina Santos Mundstock
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec

4.  Comparative evaluation of orthodontic bracket base shapes on shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Dennis Pham; Prashanti Bollu; Kishore Chaudhry; Karthikeyan Subramani
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2017-07-01

5.  Variations in enamel damage after debonding of two different bracket base designs: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Mohammad Hossein Ahangar Atashi; Amir Hooman Sadr Haghighi; Parastou Nastarin; Sina Ahangar Atashi
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2018-03-14

6.  Orthodontic molar brackets: the effect of three different base designs on shear bond strength.

Authors:  Athol P Hudson; Sias R Grobler; Angela M P Harris
Journal:  Int J Biomed Sci       Date:  2011-03

7.  The influence of no-primer adhesives and anchor pylons bracket bases on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets.

Authors:  Andrea Scribante; Maria Francesca Sfondrini; Danilo Fraticelli; Paola Daina; Alessandra Tamagnone; Paola Gandini
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-08-04       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Debonding forces of three different customized bases of a lingual bracket system.

Authors:  Jang-Won Sung; Tae-Yub Kwon; Hee-Moon Kyung
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 1.372

9.  Debonding force and shear bond strength of an array of CAD/CAM-based customized orthodontic brackets, placed by indirect bonding- An In Vitro study.

Authors:  Ha-Na Sha; Sung-Hwan Choi; Hyung-Seog Yu; Chung-Ju Hwang; Jung-Yul Cha; Kwang-Mahn Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

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

Authors:  Fouad Salama; Hessa Alrejaye; Malak Aldosari; Naif Almosa
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2018-06-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.