Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on September 14, 2007
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cjm052
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
29/6/559    most recent
cjm052v1
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 Faltermeier, A.
Right arrow Articles by Müßig, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Faltermeier, A.
Right arrow Articles by Müßig, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

An in vitro comparative assessment of different enamel contaminants during bracket bonding

Andreas Faltermeier*, Michael Behr**, Martin Rosentritt**, Claudia Reicheneder* and Dieter Müßig*

* Department of Orthodontics, University Clinics, Regensburg, Germany
** Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Clinics, Regensburg, Germany

Address for correspondence Dr Andreas Faltermeier, Department of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, D-93042 Regensburg, Germany, E-mail: Andreas.Faltermeier{at}klinik.uni-regensburg.de


  Abstract

In orthodontics, adhesive failures can occur because of saliva contamination during bonding. However, most in vitro studies concerning bond strength of saliva-contaminated enamel disregard the influence of temperature changes in a wet environment. The aim of the present study was to compare the influence of saliva, blood and etching gel remnant contamination on shear bond strength (SBS) after thermocycling.

After etching of extracted human third molars (n = 80), a conventional primer (Transbond XT) and a moisture-insensitive primer (Transbond MIP) were evaluated using the adhesive, Transbond XT, under dry conditions and after contamination with saliva, blood and etching gel remnants. To simulate temperature changes and the moisture of saliva in the oral cavity, all samples were thermocycled (6000x 5°C/55°C) in a mastication device before SBS testing. A Mann–Whitney U test was used to determine statistical differences.

Under dry conditions Transbond XT and Transbond MIP showed no significant difference in SBS. However, clinically unacceptable (P = 0.005) bond strength was observed using Transbond XT after saliva and blood contamination. In wet conditions only Transbond MIP showed sufficient bond strength.

If contamination during bonding is expected, a hydrophilic primer should be used. Under dry conditions hydrophilic or hydrophobic primers could be applied. Blood contamination seems to be a more serious problem for bond strength than saliva or etching gel contamination.


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.