Skip Navigation


The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access originally published online on September 12, 2008
The European Journal of Orthodontics 2008 30(5):495-502; doi:10.1093/ejo/cjn042
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/5/495    most recent
cjn042v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jonke, E.
Right arrow Articles by Schedle, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jonke, E.
Right arrow Articles by Schedle, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Cytotoxicity and shear bond strength of four orthodontic adhesive systems

Erwin Jonke*, Alexander Franz*, Josef Freudenthaler*, Franz König**, Hans-Peter Bantleon* and Andreas Schedle*

* Department of Orthodontics and Central Research Unit, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry
** Core Unit for Medical Statistics and Informatics, Medical University of Vienna, Austria

Address for correspondence Andreas Schedle, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Währingerstrasse 25a, A-1090 Vienna, Austria, E-mail:andreas.schedle{at}meduniwien.ac.at


  Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the cytotoxicity of four orthodontic bonding systems, Light BondTM, EnlightTM, ConciseTM, and TransbondTM, and to evaluate their shear bond strength (SBS). These orthodontic bonding materials were applied to metal brackets (Mini DiamondTM). Glass specimens were used as controls in all experiments. Only ConciseTM was a chemically cured system, the other systems were light cured. The specimens were added to L-929 fibroblast cultures immediately after fabrication or after pre-incubation for 7 days. The incubation time was 72 hours and the cells were counted by flow cytometry. One hundred and fifty-seven freshly extracted human third molars were used for testing the SBS in a universal testing machine. Statistical significance was determined using analysis of variance followed by post hoc comparisons for multiple-level alpha control.

Pairwise comparisons showed a significant difference only between Light BondTM and ConciseTM (P = 0.0126). The highest SBS was obtained with Light BondTM (23.23 ± 1.53 MPa) followed by TransbondTM (20.39 ± 1.18 MPa) and EnlightTM, (20.32 ± 1.06 MPa). ConciseTM (17.87 ± 1.04 MPa) showed the lowest SBS. The cytotoxicity of all light-cured systems for fresh specimens was comparable, whereas the chemically cured system, ConciseTM, was significantly more cytotoxic. After 7 days of pre-incubation, all systems were significantly less cyotoxic than fresh specimens (P < 0.001). Brackets alone were not cytotoxic. All bonding systems showed a clinically satisfactory bond strength higher than 10 MPa, with the chemically cured system showing the lowest SBS.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.