Abdullah Alper Oz1, Aslıhan Zeynep Oz2, Selim Arici3. 1. Assistant professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. Electronic address: alperoz@hotmail.com. 2. Assistant professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. 3. Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical failure rates and the in-vitro bond strengths of metal brackets bonded with different light-emitting diode (LED) devices and curing times. METHODS:Forty patients were included in the clinical part of this study. A split-mouth design was used, with the adhesive in group 1 cured for 10 seconds with an LED unit (Elipar S10; 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), and the adhesive in group 2 cured for 3 seconds with another LED unit (VALO Ortho; Ultradent Products, South Jordan, Utah). Bond failures during 12 months of orthodontic treatment were recorded. In-vitro performance of the brackets was also compared by bonding brackets to extracted premolars and using the same light units and curing times (n = 20 for each group). The adhesive remnant index was used to determine the bond failure interface. RESULTS:Clinical bond failure rates were 2.90% for the Elipar and 3.16% for the VALO curing units. The difference in bracket failure rates between the 2 LED devices was not statistically significant. No statistically significant difference was found between the in-vitro bond strengths of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings regarding long-term clinical survival rates and in-vitro bond strengths indicate that bracket bonding can be safely accomplished in 10 seconds of light-curing with an Elipar LED and 3 seconds of light-curing with a VALO LED.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical failure rates and the in-vitro bond strengths of metal brackets bonded with different light-emitting diode (LED) devices and curing times. METHODS: Forty patients were included in the clinical part of this study. A split-mouth design was used, with the adhesive in group 1 cured for 10 seconds with an LED unit (Elipar S10; 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), and the adhesive in group 2 cured for 3 seconds with another LED unit (VALO Ortho; Ultradent Products, South Jordan, Utah). Bond failures during 12 months of orthodontic treatment were recorded. In-vitro performance of the brackets was also compared by bonding brackets to extracted premolars and using the same light units and curing times (n = 20 for each group). The adhesive remnant index was used to determine the bond failure interface. RESULTS: Clinical bond failure rates were 2.90% for the Elipar and 3.16% for the VALO curing units. The difference in bracket failure rates between the 2 LED devices was not statistically significant. No statistically significant difference was found between the in-vitro bond strengths of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings regarding long-term clinical survival rates and in-vitro bond strengths indicate that bracket bonding can be safely accomplished in 10 seconds of light-curing with an Elipar LED and 3 seconds of light-curing with a VALO LED.
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