Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Orthodontics 2009 31(1):84-89; doi:10.1093/ejo/cjn067
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Elekdag-Turk, S.
Right arrow Articles by Turk, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Elekdag-Turk, S.
Right arrow Articles by Turk, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Debonding characteristics of a polymer mesh base ceramic bracket bonded with two different conditioning methods

Selma Elekdag-Turk, Devrim Isci, Nurhat Ozkalayci and Tamer Turk

Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Ondokuz Mayis, Samsun, Turkey

Address for correspondence Dr Selma Elekdag-Turk, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Ondokuz Mayis, 55139 Kurupelit,, Samsun, Turkey, E-mail: turkset{at}superonline.com


   Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and debonding characteristics of a polymer mesh base ceramic bracket bonded with two different surface conditioning methods. InVu Readi-Base ceramic brackets were bonded to 100 human premolars with different etching protocols. With conventional method (CM), the teeth were etched with 37 per cent phosphoric acid for 30 seconds, while Transbond Plus self-etching primer (SEP) was applied as recommended by the manufacturer. SBS testing was performed on 25 samples of each group while the remaining 25 samples of each group were subjected to plier or machine debonding after thermocycling for 1000 cycles. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was used to determine the amount of composite resin on the enamel. Statistical analysis included Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U-tests and Weibull analysis.

No significant difference was observed between the CM (9.22 MPa) and SEP (9.04 MPa) groups (P = 0.684). ARI scores of machine and plier debonding for both groups showed a significant difference (P ≤ 0.0001). Debonding with pliers showed a pronounced number of ARI scores of 3 for both groups. Polymer mesh base fractures were observed for both groups. Nevertheless, no significant differences were observed between the groups ({chi}2 = 4.304, P = 0.230).

The results of this in vitro study are encouraging, since, for the majority of specimens, all of the residual adhesive remained on the enamel surface. This type of debonding pattern has the advantage of protecting the enamel surface. Nevertheless, the base fractures at the ceramic/polymer interface might necessitate modifications in debonding strategy.


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.