Shear bond strength of metal brackets on enamel

被引:36
作者
Cozza, Paola
Martucci, Leonardo
De Toffol, Laura
Penco, Santiago Isaza
机构
[1] Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Dept Orthodont, I-00161 Rome, Italy
[2] Univ Modena, Dept Orthodont, I-41100 Modena, Italy
关键词
bracket; adhesion; shear bond strength; ARI index;
D O I
10.2319/061205-201
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the shear bond strength of different metal orthodontic brackets. Materials and Methods: Five types of orthodontic metal brackets were selected (S1, Victory Series, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif; S2, Mini Dyna-Lock, 3M Unitek; S3, Mini Sprint, Forestadent, Pforzheim, Germany; S4, Topic, Dentaurum, Inspringen, Germany; and S5, equilibrium 2, Dentaurum). Brackets were bonded on enamel surfaces of bovine incisors (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek) and were tested for shear bond strength with an Instron universal testing machine (Instron Corp, Canton, Mass). Data obtained in newtons and megapascals were analyzed with descriptive statistics and with analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) tests. The adhesive fracture site was classified with the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Results: All the specimens tested had shear bond strength adequate to resist orthodontic forces. S5 showed significantly greater bond strength when compared with the other samples, except for S1. S1, S3, and S5 showed a significantly greater bonding force. The ARI index demonstrated a large variability. Retentive structure of S1, S3, and S5 had equal validity. The enlargement of the retentive surface enhances adhesion but affects the adaptability to surface irregularity of the enamel, increasing the risk of fracture at the interface with the bracket. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that probably the retentive base extension can be lower than 7 MM2 proposed in previous studies as the minimal area.
引用
收藏
页码:851 / 856
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   CLINICAL-TRIALS WITH CRYSTAL-GROWTH CONDITIONING AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ACID-ETCH ENAMEL PRETREATMENT [J].
ARTUN, J ;
BERGLAND, S .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1984, 85 (04) :333-340
[2]  
Bishara SE, 2002, ANGLE ORTHOD, V72, P554
[3]  
Buonocore MG., 1955, J DENT RES, V34, P849, DOI DOI 10.1177/00220345550340060801
[4]   BOND STRENGTH OF ORTHODONTIC DIRECT-BONDING CEMENT-BRACKET SYSTEMS AS STUDIED INVITRO [J].
BUZZITTA, VAJ ;
HALLGREN, SE ;
POWERS, JM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1982, 81 (02) :87-92
[5]   In vitro comparison of the retention capacity of new aesthetic brackets [J].
Fernandez, L ;
Canut, JA .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 1999, 21 (01) :71-77
[6]   Effects of high-speed curing devices on shear bond strength and microleakage of orthodontic brackets [J].
James, JW ;
Miller, BH ;
English, JD ;
Tadlock, LP ;
Buschang, PH .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2003, 123 (05) :555-561
[7]  
Lalani N, 2000, ANGLE ORTHOD, V70, P28
[8]   RETENTIVE SHEAR STRENGTHS OF VARIOUS BONDING ATTACHMENT BASES [J].
LOPEZ, JI .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1980, 77 (06) :669-678
[9]   The relationship between bond strength and orthodontic bracket base surface area with conventional and microetched foil-mesh bases [J].
MacColl, GA ;
Rossouw, PE ;
Titley, KC ;
Yamin, C .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1998, 113 (03) :276-281
[10]   VARIABLES INFLUENCING THE BOND STRENGTH OF METAL ORTHODONTIC BRACKET BASES [J].
MAIJER, R ;
SMITH, DC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1981, 79 (01) :20-34