nach oben

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Erschienen in:

17.10.2022 | Original Article

Bond strength, degree of conversion, and microorganism adhesion using different bracket-to-enamel bonding protocols

verfasst von: Lorena Marques Ferreira de Sena, DDS MS PhD, Dayanne Monielle Duarte Moura, DDS MS PhD, Isabelle Helena Gurgel de Carvalho, DDS, MS, Adjunct Professor Leopoldina de Fatima Dantas de Almeida, DDS MS PhD, Nathalia Ramos da Silva, DDS MS, Adjunct Professor Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção e Souza, DDS MS PhD

Erschienen in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Sonderheft 3/2023

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bonding protocols and the type of orthodontic resin on the adhesion of microorganisms, degree of conversion (DC), and shear bond strength (SBS) of metallic brackets to enamel.

Methods

A total of 60 bovine incisors were prepared and randomly divided into 6 groups (n = 10): “bonding protocol” (A: phosphoric acid; AXT: A+Transbond™ XT primer adhesive [all Transbond™ products from 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA]; and SE: Transbond™ Plus Self Etching Primer) and “orthodontic resin” (XT: Transbond™ XT adhesive paste and CC: Transbond™ Plus Color Change). After bonding, the samples were subjected to thermocycling (5000 cycles) and to the SBS test. Bond failures were classified according to the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Next, 60 enamel blocks were sterilized in ethylene oxide in order to perform the CFU (Streptococcus mutans) assay in vitro to analyze the colony forming units (CFU/mL). Then, 60 discs of each orthodontic resin were made to measure the DC. The SBS (MPa), CFU/mL, and DC (%) data were statistically analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s test (5%) was performed for the DC.

Results

CFU and SBS revealed no significance for all factors (P > 0.05). Tukey’s test showed that A_XT (acid+Transbond™ XT adhesive paste) presented the highest DC (70.38% ± 10.5), while AXT_XT (acid+Transbond™ XT primer adhesive+Transbond™ XT adhesive paste) showed the lowest (23.47% ± 10.4). An ARI score of 2 was more frequent for the CC resin and an ARI score of 4 for the XT resin.

Conclusion

The CC resin does not reduce adhesion of S. mutans around orthodontic brackets and the bonding protocol did not influence the SBS, although the SE and A_XT groups contributed to a better DC.

Caldeira EM, Telles V, Mattos CT, Nojima MCG (2019) Surface morphologic evaluation of orthodontic bonding systems under conditions of cariogenic challenge. Braz oral res 33:e29. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0029CrossRefPubMed

Shafiei F, Sardarian A, Fekrazad R, Farjood A (2019) Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with a universal adhesive using different etching methods. Dental Press J Orthod 24(4):33.e1–33.e8. https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.24.4.33.e1-8.onlCrossRefPubMed

Leão Filho JCB, Braz AKS, Araujo RE, Tanaka OM, Pithon MM (2015) Enamel quality after debonding: evaluation by optical coherence tomography. Braz Dent J 26(4):384–389. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201300406CrossRefPubMed

Mirhashemi AH, Hakimi S, Ahmad Akhoundi MS, Chiniforush N (2016) Prevention of enamel adjacent to bracket demineralization following carbon dioxide laser radiation and titanium tetra fluoride solution treatment: an in vitro study. J Lasers Med Sci 7(3):192–196. https://doi.org/10.15171/jlms.2016.33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Guzmán-Armstrong S, Chalmers J, Warren JJ (2010) Ask us. White spot lesions: prevention and treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(6):690–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.007CrossRefPubMed

Rosenbloom RG, Tinanoff N (1991) Salivary streptococcus mutans levels in patients before, during, and after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 100(1):35–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(91)70046-YCrossRefPubMed

Enaia M, Bock N, Ruf S (2011) White-spot lesions during multibracket appliance treatment: a challenge for clinical excellence. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 140(1):e17–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.12.016CrossRefPubMed

Uysal T, Amasyali M, Ozcan S, Koyuturk AE, Sagdic D (2011) Effect of antibacterial monomer-containing adhesive on enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets: an in-vivo study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139(5):650–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.038CrossRefPubMed

van Waveren Hogervorst WL, Feilzer AJ, Prahl-Andersen B (2000) The air-abrasion technique versus the conventional acid-etching technique: a quantification of surface enamel loss and a comparison of shear bond strength. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 117(1):20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(00)70244-710CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ozer T, Başaran G, Berk N (2008) Laser etching of enamel for orthodontic bonding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134(2):193–197CrossRefPubMed

11.

Romano FL, Tavares SW, Nouer DF, Consani S, Borges de Araújo Magnani MB (2009) Shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded with a new orthodontic composite. Braz J Oral Sci 8(2):76–80

12.

Alencar EQS, Nobrega MLM, Dametto FR, Santos PBD, Pinheiro FHSL (2016) Comparison of two methods of visual magnification for removal of adhesive flash during bracket placement using two types of orthodontic bonding agents. Dental Press J Orthod 21(6):43–50. https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.21.6.043-050.oarCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Esteves CM, Ota-Tsuzuki C, Reis AF, Rodrigues JÁ (2010) Antibacterial activity of various self-etching adhesive systems against oral streptococci. Oper Dent 35(4):448–453. https://doi.org/10.2341/09-297-LCrossRefPubMed

14.

Jacobo C, Torrella F, Bravo-González LA, Ortiz AJ, Vicente A (2014) In vitro study of the antibacterial properties and microbial colonization susceptibility of four self-etching adhesives used in orthodontics. Eur J Orthod 36(2):200–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt032CrossRefPubMed

15.

Baysal A, Yasa A, Sogut O, Ozturk MA, Uysal T (2015) Effects of different orthodontic primers on enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets. J Orofac Orthop 76(5):421–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-015-0304-6CrossRefPubMed

16.

Türkkahraman H, Adanir N, Gungor AY, Alkis H (2010) In vitro evaluation of shear bond strenghts of colour change adhesives. Eur J Orthod 32(5):571–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp149CrossRefPubMed

17.

Ahn SJ, Lim BS, Lee SJ (2010) Surface characteristics of orthodontic adhesives and effects on streptococcal adhesion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137(4):489–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.05.015CrossRefPubMed

18.

Santos BM, Pithon MM, Ruellas AC, Sant’Anna EF (2010) Shear bond strength of brackets bonded with hydrophilic and hydrophobic bond systems under contamination. Angle Orthod 80(5):963–967. https://doi.org/10.2319/022310-113.1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Amato PA, Martins RP, dos Santos Cruz CA, Capella MV, Martins LP (2014) Time reduction of light curing: Influence on conversion degree and microhardness of orthodontic composite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 146(1):40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.022CrossRefPubMed

20.

dos Santos RL, de Sampaio GA, de Carvalho FG, Pithon MM, Guênes GM, Alves PM (2014) Influence of degree of conversion on the biocompatibility of different composites in vivo. J Adhes Dent 16(1):15–20. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a29704CrossRefPubMed

21.

Romano FL, Valério RA, Gomes-Silva JM, Ferreira JTL, Faria G, Borsatto MC (2012) Clinical evaliation of the failure rate of metallic brackets bonded with orthodontic composites. Braz Dent J 23(4):399–402. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402012000400015CrossRefPubMed

22.

Narmada IB, Cynthia AI, Triwardhani A (2019) Comparison of antibacterial inhibitory effect on streptococcus mutans and tensile strength between chitosan-based bonding adhesives and commercial products. Indian J Dent Res 30(4):553–557. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_236_18CrossRefPubMed

23.

Caldeira EM, Osorio A, Oberosler ELC, Vaitsman DS, Alviano DS, Nojima MCG (2013) Antimicrobial and fluoride release capacity of orthodontic bonding materials. J Appl Oral Sci 21(4):327–334. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-775720130010CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

International Organization for Standardization (2003) Dentistry: testing of adhesion to tooth structure. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

25.

Sena LMF, Barbosa HAM, Caldas SGFR, Ozcan M, Souza ROA (2018) Effect of different bonding protocols on degree of monomer conversion and bond strength between orthodontic brackets and enamel. Braz Oral Res 32:e58. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0058CrossRefPubMed

26.

Stansbury JW, Dickens SH (2001) Determination of double bond conversion in dental resins by near infrared spectroscopy. Dent Mater 17(1):71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00062-2CrossRefPubMed

27.

Bishara SE, Trulove TS (1990) Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part II. Findings and clinical implications. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 98(3):263–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81604-XCrossRefPubMed

28.

Reynolds IR (1975) A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 2(3):171–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/0301228X.1975.11743666CrossRef

29.

Passalini P, Fidalgo TK, Caldeira EM, Gleiser R, Nojima Mda C, Maia LC (2010) Preventive effect of fluoridated orthodontic resins subjected to high cariogenic challenges. Braz Dent J 21(3):211–215. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402010000300006CrossRefPubMed

30.

Uşümez S, Orhan M, Uşümez A (2002) Laser etching of enamel for direct bonding with an Er,Cr:YSGG hydrokinetic laser system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 122(6):649–656. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.127294CrossRefPubMed

31.

Raji SH, Birang R, Majdzade F, Ghorbanipour R (2012) Evaluation of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with Er-YAG laser etching. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 9(3):288–293PubMed

32.

Shinya M, Shinya A, Lassila LV, Varrela J, Vallittu PK (2009) Enhanced degree of monomer conversion of orthodontic adhesives using a glass-fiber layer under the bracket. Angle Orthod 79(3):546–550. https://doi.org/10.2319/051008-256.1CrossRefPubMed

33.

Santos RL, Pithon MM, Fernandes AB, Cabral MG, Ruellas AC (2010) Biocompatibility of orthodontic adhesives in rat subcutaneous tissue. J Appl Oral Sci 18(5):503–508. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572010000500013CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Ahrari F, Tavakkol Afshari J, Poosti M, Brook A (2010) Cytotoxicity of orthodontic bonding adhesive resins on human oral fibroblasts. Eur J Orthod 32(6):688–692. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq019CrossRefPubMed

35.

Malkoc S, Corekci B, Ulker HE, Yalçin M, Sengün A (2010) Cytotoxic effects of orthodontic composites. Angle Orthod 80(4):571–576. https://doi.org/10.2319/092809-537.1CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Bond strength, degree of conversion, and microorganism adhesion using different bracket-to-enamel bonding protocols
verfasst von: Lorena Marques Ferreira de Sena, DDS MS PhD
Dayanne Monielle Duarte Moura, DDS MS PhD
Isabelle Helena Gurgel de Carvalho, DDS, MS
Adjunct Professor Leopoldina de Fatima Dantas de Almeida, DDS MS PhD
Nathalia Ramos da Silva, DDS MS
Adjunct Professor Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção e Souza, DDS MS PhD
Publikationsdatum: 17.10.2022
Verlag: Springer Medizin
Erschienen in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Ausgabe Sonderheft 3/2023
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Elektronische ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00430-6

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Bond strength, degree of conversion, and microorganism adhesion using different bracket-to-enamel bonding protocols

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Sonderheft 3/2023

Effects of maxillary expansion and protraction on pharyngeal airway dimensions in relation to changes in head posture and hyoid position

Comparison of the asymmetry index determined on digital panoramic radiographic images and on posteroanterior cephalometric images: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Comparative assessment of frictional forces between differently designed esthetic brackets during simulated canine retraction

Effects of functional orthopedic treatment on mandibular trabecular bone in class II patients using fractal analysis

Multiheaded mandibular condyles

Soft tissue evaluation after maxillary protraction with RPE or with the ALT-RAMEC protocol

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter