Comparison of three orthodontic bonding systems in white spot lesion development: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the development of white spot lesions (WSLs) during fixed orthodontic therapy among a conventional three-step bonding system, a self-etching primer bonding system, and a one-step adhesive bonding system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients were randomly allocated into three groups (group 1, conventional bonding system, n = 25; group 2, self-etch primer, n = 25; group 3, primer mixed with adhesive composite, n = 25). Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) was used to assess WSL parameters. Images were captured and then analyzed before treatment and at 2 months and 4 months after bond up. Lesion area (pixels), mean fluorescence loss (ΔF), and the number of newly developed WSLs were compared within and among the three groups. The significance level was P ≤ .05. RESULTS: The mean increase in lesion area was 31.3 ± 2.8 pixels, 38.4 ± 4.3 pixels, and 119.5 ± 5.3 pixels for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P ≤ .001). For ΔF, the loss was 3.3% ± 0.3%, 4.4% ± 0.2%, and 6.6% ± 0.2% for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. These changes were significantly different (P ≤ .01 to P ≤ .001). The incidence of newly developed lesions was 9.5 WSLs in group 1, 10 WSLs in group 2, and 15.9 WSLs in group 3. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of primer contributed to the development of a larger number of and more severe WSLs.

Comparison of periodontal status and failure rates with different retainer bonding methods and adhesives: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This single-center, randomized clinical trial evaluated and compared retainer bonding among different methods and adhesives in terms of periodontal status and failure rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 patients from the orthodontic department of Pamukkale University were randomly assigned to the following 4 groups: group 1, direct bonding (DB) with two-step adhesive; group 2, DB with one-step adhesive; group 3, indirect bonding (IDB) with two-step adhesive; and group 4, IDB with one-step adhesive. Eligibility criteria included good finishing results and oral hygiene, no periodontal or systemic problems, and no missing anterior teeth or restorations. Randomization was carried out using computer-generated random numbers with allocation concealment by opaque, sealed envelopes. The main outcomes were plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and calculus index (CI) recorded at bonding, 6 months (T1), and 12 months (T2) after bonding. A secondary outcome was failure rate. The periodontal outcome assessor was blinded. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and chi-square test. RESULTS: PI and GI increased with time in all study groups, but there were no significant differences among groups at any time point. A small amount of calculus was observed in all study groups, with the increase in CI for group 3 significantly greater at the T2-T1 time interval (P < .05). There were no significant differences between groups for 12-month failure rates. CONCLUSIONS: The one-step retainer adhesive was similar in terms of periodontal status and failure rate. Therefore, a one-step adhesive can be used during bonding, regardless of technique.

Effectiveness of different orthodontic adhesives and a universal bonding resin on the bond strength of brackets to different ceramics / Eficácia de diferentes adesivos ortodônticos e uma resina de ligação universal na resistência adesiva de bráquetes à diferentes cerâmicas

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of different adhesives on the shear bond strength (SBS) of brackets bonded to different ceramic materials. Material and Methods: Fifty disk-shaped specimens were produced from lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) and monolithic zirconia (Cercon) materials. Each specimen was polished with a three-step diamond polishing system. The polished ceramic surfaces were conditioned with universal bonding resin (Assure Plus) without pre-treatment, except for two specimens. Central brackets were bonded onto different ceramic specimens with different adhesives as follows: group 1: conventional adhesive onto the lithium disilicate; group 2: one-step adhesive onto the lithium disilicate; group 3: conventional adhesive onto the monolithic zirconia; group 4: one-step adhesive onto the monolithic zirconia. After thermal cycling, the specimens were subjected to the SBS test. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were also recorded to evaluate bond failure type. Kruskal­Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: There were statistically significant differences among the SBS values (p˂0.05). The monolithic zirconia group with universal bonding resin and conventional orthodontic adhesive demonstrated the highest SBS value (6.34 MPa) and ARI scores. The lithium disilicate group showed the lowest SBS value (2.17 MPa) with the same protocol. No adhesive remained on the lithium disilicate specimens. Conclusion: One-step adhesive and universal bonding resin combination should not be considered as an alternative for lithium disilicate and monolithic zirconia restorations. Conventional adhesive and universal bonding resin application can be effective on non-pretreated ceramic surfaces during orthodontic bonding (AU)

Objetivo: o objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar a eficácia de diferentes adesivos na resistência ao cisalhamento (SBS) de bráquetes colados a diferentes materiais cerâmicos. Material e métodos: Cinquenta espécimes em forma de disco foram produzidos a partir de materiais de dissilicato de lítio (IPS e.max CAD) e zircônia monolítica (Cercon). Cada amostra foi polida com um sistema de polimento de diamante de três passos. As superfícies cerâmicas polidas foram condicionadas com resina de ligação universal (Assure Plus) sem pré-tratamento, exceto para dois corpos-de-prova. Bráquetes centrais foram colados em diferentes corpos de prova cerâmicos com diferentes adesivos da seguinte forma: grupo 1: adesivo convencional sobre dissilicato de lítio; grupo 2: adesivo de uma etapa sobre o dissilicato de lítio; grupo 3: adesivo convencional sobre zircônia monolítica; grupo 4: adesivo de uma etapa sobre a zircônia monolítica. Após a ciclagem térmica, os corpos-de-prova foram submetidos ao teste SBS. Os escores do índice de remanescente adesivo (ARI) também foram registrados para avaliar o tipo de falha de adesão. Os testes U de Kruskal-Wallis e Mann-Whitney foram usados para análise estatística. Resultados: Houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os valores de SBS (p˂0,05). O grupo de zircônia monolítica com resina de colagem universal e adesivo ortodôntico convencional demonstrou o maior valor de SBS (6,34 MPa) e escores de ARI. O grupo de dissilicato de lítio apresentou o menor valor de SBS (2,17 MPa) com o mesmo protocolo. Nenhum adesivo permaneceu nas amostras de dissilicato de lítio. Conclusão: A combinação de adesivo de uma etapa e resina de ligação universal não deve ser considerada como uma alternativa para restaurações de dissilicato de lítio e zircônia monolítica. A aplicação de adesivo convencional e resina de colagem universal podem ser eficazes em superfícies de cerâmica não pré-tratadas durante a colagem ortodôntica (AU)

Eight-year Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin and Interfacial Nanomechanical Properties of a One-step Adhesive.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of a one-step self-etch adhesive (1-SEA) to dentin and its interfacial nanomechanical properties after 8 years of water storage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Flat coronal dentin surfaces of extracted human third molars were bonded with a 1-SEA (Clearfil S3 Bond Plus, CS3+) and built up with a hybrid resin composite (Clearfil AP-X). After storage in water for 24 h or 8 years, non-trimmed stick-shaped specimens were fabricated from the central part of each bonded tooth and subjected to the µTBS test at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Failure modes and the morphology of debonded interfaces were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). In addition, the elastic modulus (E) and hardness (H) of the adhesive layer and the resin composite were determined by an instrumented nanoindentation test. The acquired µTBS, E, and H data were statistically analyzed using t-tests to examine the effect of storage time (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The 8-year µTBS was slightly lower than that after 24 h, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.123). The SEM observation of debonded surfaces after 8 years revealed extrusions and lacunas. E and H of the adhesive layer and the resin composite significantly decreased over the 8-year water storage (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although 8 years of water storage did not decrease the µTBS of CS3+ significantly, the observed failure mode patterns and significantly decreased nanomechanical properties indicated resin degradation of the adhesive and the resin composite.

Effects of enamel deproteinization with different application times on the shear bond strength of a self-etching primer: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of enamel deproteinization on the shear bond strength of a self-etching primer Transbond Plus™(TBP), with different application times of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl 5.25%), primarily and secondarily on the adhesive remnant index score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-five freshly extracted human premolars were randomly and blindly divided into five groups according to the enamel surface preparation, as follows (n=25): group 1(control): Etching with 37% phosphoric acid for 15seconds+Bonding; group 2 (control): TBP™ without NaOCl, group 3: 60seconds NaOCl+TBP™, group 4: 30seconds NaOCl+TBP™, group 5: 15seconds NaOCl+TBP™. The same composite resin was used (Transbond XT™) to bond the orthodontic metal brackets. After the immersion of the teeth in distilled water at 37°C for 24hours the shear bond strength was measured using the universal testing machine and the adhesive remnant index score (ARI) was evaluated under an optical microscope (25×). RESULTS: The mean SBS values (inMPa) of the groups were respectively: group 1: 13.03±5.36; group 2: 12.28±3.06; group 3: 12.38±4.55; group 4: 12.98±5.76; and group 5: 11.73±5.67. Enamel deproteinization increased the SBS for groups 3 and 4, but no statistically significant difference was found between the five groups (P=0.883). Group 1 showed the highest ARI scores, with 52% of the teeth retaining all the adhesive (score 3). However, for all the other groups, scores 0 and 1 were predominant, with less than half of the adhesive or no adhesive at all remaining on the teeth. CONCLUSIONS: Enamel deproteinization with sodium hypochlorite (5.25%) and the variation of its application time has no effect on the SBS of the self-etching primer Transbond Plus ™.

Layering mechanism of MDP-Ca salt produced in demineralization of enamel and dentin apatite.

OBJECTIVE: The 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP) (EX adhesives)-based one-step self-etch adhesives have become widely utilized due to their simplified application procedures. The aim of this study was to determine the type of the molecular species of calcium salts of MDP (MDP-Ca salts) that form a layered structure and to understand the layering mechanism of MDP-Ca salts. METHODS: The EX adhesives were prepared by varying the amounts of MDP (25.6, 49.9, 80.5 and 116.1mg) added in 1g of the EX adhesive. Enamel and dentin reactant residues were obtained after the reaction of each EX adhesive to enamel or dentin particles for 30s. The chemical analyses of both reactant residues were then performed. RESULTS: The molecular species of MDP-Ca salts that form a layered structure were determined as mono-calcium salt (MCS-MD) and di-calcium salts of the MDP dimer (DCS-MD). The dentin sample showed two types of characteristic XRD peaks assigned to the layer structure, since the dentin produced DCS-MD along with MCS-MD in contrast to the enamel sample. A mono-calcium salt of the MDP monomer (MCS-MM), a predominant molecular species, was not contributed to a layered-structure formation, since the intensities of characteristic XRD peaks are limited by the production of DCS-MD and MCS-MD. SIGNIFICANCE: The self-assembled layering of MCS-MD and DCS-MD is associated by a hydrophobic bond between two 10-methylene groups in MCS-MD and DCS-MD. The MCS-MD may form a more tightly-packed layered structure than DCS-MD by the hydrogen bonded interaction between hydroxy groups bonded to each phosphorous atom.

Enamel shear bond strength of two orthodontic self-etching bonding systems compared to Transbond™ XT.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores of two self-etching no-mix adhesives (Prompt L-Pop™ and Scotchbond™) for orthodontic appliances to the commonly used total etch system Transbond XT™ (in combination with phosphoric acid). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 60 human premolars were randomly divided into three groups of 20 specimens each. In group 1 (control), brackets were bonded with Transbond™ XT primer. Prompt L-Pop™ (group 2) and Scotchbond™ Universal (group 3) were used in the experimental groups. Lower premolar brackets were bonded by light curing the adhesive. After 24 h of storage, the shear bond strength (SBS) was measured using a Zwicki 1120 testing machine. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was determined under 10× magnification. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to statistically compare the SBS and the ARI scores. RESULTS: No significant differences in the SBS between any of the experimental groups were detected (group 1: 15.49 ± 3.28 MPa; group 2: 13.89 ± 4.95 MPa; group 3: 14.35 ± 3.56 MPa; p = 0.489), nor were there any significant differences in the ARI scores (p = 0.368). CONCLUSIONS: Using the two self-etching no-mix adhesives (Prompt L-Pop™ and Scotchbond™) for orthodontic appliances does not affect either the SBS or ARI scores in comparison with the commonly used total-etch system Transbond™ XT. In addition, Scotchbond™ Universal supports bonding on all types of surfaces (enamel, metal, composite, and porcelain) with no need for additional primers. It might therefore be helpful for simplifying bonding in orthodontic procedures.

Adhesive performance of a multi-mode adhesive system: 1-year in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the adhesive stability over time of a multi-mode one-step adhesive applied using different bonding techniques on human coronal dentine. The hypotheses tested were that microtensile bond strength (µTBS), interfacial nanoleakage expression and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) activation are not affected by the adhesive application mode (following the use of self-etch technique or with the etch-and-rinse technique on dry or wet dentine) or by ageing for 24h, 6 months and 1year in artificial saliva. METHODS: Human molars were cut to expose middle/deep dentine and assigned to one of the following bonding systems (N=15): (1) Scotchbond Universal (3M ESPE) self-etch mode, (2) Scotchbond Universal etch-and-rinse technique on wet dentine, (3) Scotchbond Universal etch-and-rinse technique on dry dentine, and (4) Prime&Bond NT (Dentsply De Trey) etch-and-rinse technique on wet dentine (control). Specimens were processed for µTBS test in accordance with the non-trimming technique and stressed to failure after 24h, 6 months or 1 year. Additional specimens were processed and examined to assay interfacial nanoleakage and MMP expression. RESULTS: At baseline, no differences between groups were found. After 1 year of storage, Scotchbond Universal applied in the self-etch mode and Prime&Bond NT showed higher µTBS compared to the other groups. The lowest nanoleakage expression was found for Scotchbond Universal applied in the self-etch mode, both at baseline and after storage. MMPs activation was found after application of each tested adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the use of the self-etch approach for bonding the tested multi-mode adhesive system to dentine due to improved stability over time. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Improved bonding effectiveness of the tested universal adhesive system on dentine may be obtained if the adhesive is applied with the self-etch approach.

Effect of a desensitizer on microtensile bond strength of different adhesives / 대한치과보존학회지

This study evaluated the influence of a desensitizer(MS coat) on microtensile bond strength of different adhesives: a three-step adhesive(All-Bond 2), a two-step adhesive(Single Bond), a one-step adhesive(One-up Bond F). Non-caries extracted human molars were used. Dentin surface was obtained by horizontal section on midportion of crown using a water-cooled low speed diamond saw. Teeth were randomly divided into 6 group. AMO(MS coat + All Bond)-, SMO(MS coat + Single Bond)- and OMO(MS coat + One-up Bond F)-dentin surface were treated with 17% EDTA before bonded adhesive. AMX-, SMX- and OMX-dentin surface were bonded with All-Bond 2, Single Bond and One-up Bond F, respectively, with no previous treatment with MS coat and 17% EDTA. About 1cm high resin composite(Z-250(TM)) were incrementally build-up on the treated surface. The specimens for the microtensile test were serially sectioned perpendicular to the adhesive layer to obtain 0.7x0.7 mm sticks. 30 sticks were prepared from each group. After that, tensile bond strength for each stick was measured with Microtensile Tester at a 1mm/min crosshead speed. Fractured dentin surfaces were observed under the SEM. The results were statistically analysed by using a One-way ANOVA and Tukey's test(p<0.05). Value in MPa were: AMO-44.35+/-13.21; SMO-39.35+/-13.32; OMO-31.07+/-10.25; AMX-49.22+/-16.38; SMX-56.02+/-13.35; OMX-72.93+/-16.19. Application of MS coat reduced microtensile bond strengths of both Single Bond and One-up Bond F, whereas microtensile bond strengths of All-Bond 2 were not affected significantly.