The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on October 25, 2007
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cjm056
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evaluation of the debonding strength of orthodontic brackets using three different bonding systems
* Department of Oral and Maxillo-Facial Science, University of Naples Federico II
** Institute of Composite and Biomedical Materials, National Research Council, Naples, Italy
Address for correspondence Dr Rosa Valletta, Dipartimento di Scienze Odontostomatologiche e Maxillo-Facciali, Università degli studi di Napoli "Federico II", Via S. Pansini, 580131 Napoli, Italy, E-mail: valletta{at}unina.it
 |
Abstract |
|---|
The aim of this work was to investigate the stability of the bracket–adhesive–enamel interface, as a function of adhesive material and of debonding procedure, in order to assess which debonding technique is the least detrimental to the enamel. Ninety lower adult bovine incisors were selected and metallic orthodontic brackets were bonded using three adhesive systems: Concise, Transbond, and Fuji Ortho. Three different debonding procedures were used based on tensile, shear, and torsional stresses. One-way analysis of variance statistical analysis was employed to compare mechanical properties, while the adhesive remnant index was used to evaluate fracture properties.
Each adhesive material used showed a statistical difference in tensile failure. The difference between shear and torsion failure loads was statistically significant only for the Fuji GC sample (P < 0.01). The shear test was the most damaging to the enamel surface.
Transbond luting resulted in greater adhesion than the Concise or Fuji Ortho systems. Fuji Ortho was more prone to accidental debonding, while Transbond tended to cause enamel lesions, since high loads were required to debond the bracket. Of the three modes examined, torsional debonding stress resulted in the least enamel damage.