Literature DB >> 9971921

A comparison of the shear bond strengths of two glass ionomer cements.

M P Meehan1, T F Foley, A H Mamandras.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the in vitro shear bond strength (in megapascals) and location of bond failure with two light-cured glass ionomer resin systems. One system was a hybrid glass ionomer cement with resin (GC Orthodontics, Aslip, Ill), and the other system a glass-filled resin system (Reliance Orthodontic Products, Inc, Itasca, Ill). These systems, Fuji Ortho LC (GC Orthodontics) and Ultra Band Lok (Reliance), respectively, were compared to a light-cured composite resin. Maxillary premolar brackets (n = 200) were bonded to the facial surface of human premolar teeth. The two glass ionomer resin systems were each evaluated by two protocols, one according to the manufacturers' direction plus a variation of their respective technique. The five distinct groups (n = 40) were stored in 37 degreesC distilled water for 30 days and subjected to thermocycling before shear bond strength testing. The findings indicated that large variations existed between the bond strengths of the materials tested. The laboratory shear bond strength of the glass-filled resin glass ionomer cement (Reliance), whether tested in a dry or moist field, was similar to the composite control with all of the previous materials being significantly (P <.01) higher than both the hybrid glass ionomer cement groups (Fuji Ortho LC). However, the hybrid glass ionomer cement with enamel conditioner demonstrated a clinically acceptable mean megapascal value. The Adhesive Remnant Index values ranged from 0.53 to 1.62. The hybrid glass ionomer cement without enamel conditioning recorded the lowest mean adhesive remnant index score and the lowest mean megapascal score. Although both products are glass ionomer resin systems, their individual chemistries vary; this affects their clinical performance. Clinically, it may be suggested that glass ionomers used in a dry field may be beneficial for orthodontic bonding, and that glass ionomer resin systems used in a moist environment need an enamel conditioner.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9971921     DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70338-0

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


  6 in total

1.  Effect of adhesive application prior to bracket bonding with flowable composites.

Authors:  Alberto Albaladejo; Javier Montero; Rafael Gómez de Diego; Antonio López-Valverde
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 2.079

2.  Comparison of the effect of three cements on prevention of enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic bands.

Authors:  Mehdi Kashani; Sareh Farhadi; Neda Rastegarfard
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2012-09-01

3.  Moisture insensitive primer: A myth or truth.

Authors:  Chandresh Shukla; Rajkumar Maurya; Upendra Jain; Ankur Gupta; Jayshree Garg
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2014-10

4.  Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of RMGI and Composite Resin for Orthodontic Bracket Bonding.

Authors:  Soghra Yassaei; Abdolrahim Davari; Mahjobeh Goldani Moghadam; Ahmad Kamaei
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2014-05-31

5.  Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro.

Authors:  Monika Aleksiejunaite; Antanas Sidlauskas; Arunas Vasiliauskas
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2017-03-13

6.  Covering of fiber-reinforced composite bars by adhesive materials, is it necessary to improve the bond strength of lingual retainers?

Authors:  Farzin Heravi; Navid Kerayechian; Saied Mostafa Moazzami; Hooman Shafaee; Parya Heravi
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2015 Oct-Dec
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.