Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on September 13, 2009
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cjp090
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 Yagci, A.
Right arrow Articles by Ramoglu, S. I.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yagci, A.
Right arrow Articles by Ramoglu, S. I.
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.

Microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with the custom base indirect bonding technique

Ahmet Yagci*, Tancan Uysal*, Mustafa Ulker** and Sabri Ilhan Ramoglu*

* Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey
** Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey

Address for correspondence Dr Tancan Uysal, Erciyes Universitesi, Dis Hekimligi Fakultesi, Ortodonti AD, Melikgazi, Kayseri 38039, Turkey, E-mail: tancanuysal{at}yahoo.com


  Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare microleakage of orthodontic brackets between enamel–composite and composite–bracket interfaces at the occlusal and gingival margins, bonded using indirect bonding systems with that of a conventional direct bonding method. Forty freshly extracted human maxillary premolar teeth were randomly divided into two groups. In group 1, the brackets were bonded to teeth directly according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Group 2 consisted of 20 teeth bonded indirectly with Transbond XT (3M-Unitek), as the adhesive, and Sondhi Rapid Set A/B Primer (3M-Unitek), a filled resin primer. After bonding, the specimens were further sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5 per cent basic fuchsine for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for microleakage at the enamel–composite and composite–bracket interfaces from both the occlusal and gingival margins. Statistical analyses were performed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U-tests with Bonferroni correction.

The gingival sides of group 1 displayed a higher median microleakage score than the occlusal side at the enamel–composite interface but this was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). All occlusal margins in both groups showed no microleakage under orthodontic brackets at the enamel–composite or composite–bracket interfaces. Comparisons of the microleakage scores between the direct and the indirect bonding groups at the enamel–composite and composite–bracket interfaces indicated no statistically significant microleakage differences at the gingival and occlusal margins (P > 0.05). The type of bonding method (direct versus indirect) did not significantly affect the amount of microleakage at the enamel–composite–bracket complex.


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.