Skip Navigation


The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access originally published online on July 25, 2005
The European Journal of Orthodontics 2005 27(5):477-483; doi:10.1093/ejo/cji051
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
27/5/477    most recent
cji051v1
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 ISI Web of Science
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 arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Movahhed, H. Z.
Right arrow Articles by Syverud, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Movahhed, H. Z.
Right arrow Articles by Syverud, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

An in vitro comparison of the shear bond strength of a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and a composite adhesive for bonding orthodontic brackets

Hassan Z. Movahhed*, Bjørn Øgaard* and Morten Syverud**

* Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, ** NIOM – Scandinavian Institute of Dental Materials, Oslo, Norway

Address for correspondence Professor Bjørn Øgaard, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, PO Box 1109 Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway. E-mail: bogaard{at}odont.uio.no

The shear bond strength (SBS) of a light-cured, resin-reinforced glass ionomer and a composite adhesive in combination with a self-etching primer was compared after different setting times to evaluate when orthodontic wires could be placed. Additionally, the fracture site after debonding was assessed using the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). Eighty freshly extracted human premolars were used. Twenty teeth were randomly assigned to each of four groups: (1) brackets bonded with Transbond XT with a Transbond Plus etching primer and debonded within 5 minutes; (2) brackets bonded with Fuji Ortho LC and debonded within 5 minutes; (3) brackets bonded as for group 1 and debonded within 15 minutes; (4) brackets bonded as for group 2 and debonded within 15 minutes. The SBS of each sample was determined with an Instron machine.

The mean SBS were, respectively: (1) 8.8 ± 2 MPa; (2) 6.6 ± 2.5 MPa; (3) 11 ± 1.6 MPa and (4) 9.6 ± 1.6 MPa. Interpolating the cumulative fracture probability by means of a Weibull analysis, the 10 per cent probabilities of fracture for the groups were found to be attained for shear stresses of 6.1, 3.1, 8.3 and 7.1 MPa, respectively. Chi-square testing of the ARI scores revealed that the nature of the remnant did not vary significantly with time, but the type of bonding material could generally be distinguished in leaving more or less than 10 per cent of bonding material on the tooth. After debonding, the Transbond system was likely to leave adhesive on at least 10 per cent of the bonded area of the tooth.

The present findings indicate that brackets bonded with either Transbond XT in combination with Transbond Plus etching primer and Fuji Ortho LC had adequate bond strength at 5 minutes and were even stronger 15 minutes after initial bonding.


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
R. Valletta, D. Prisco, R. De Santis, L. Ambrosio, and R. Martina
Evaluation of the debonding strength of orthodontic brackets using three different bonding systems
Eur J Orthod, December 1, 2007; 29(6): 571 - 577.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.