These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of nonrinse conditioning solution and a compomer as an alternative method of bonding orthodontic bracket.
    Author: Bishara SE, Laffoon JF, VonWald L, Warren JJ.
    Journal: Angle Orthod; 2001 Dec; 71(6):461-5. PubMed ID: 11771784.
    Abstract:
    Damage to the enamel surface during bonding and debonding of orthodontic brackets is a clinical concern. Alternative bonding methods that minimize enamel surface damage while maintaining a clinically useful bond strength are an aim of current research. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of using two enamel conditioners and adhesives on the shear bond strength and bracket failure location. Forty freshly extracted human molars were pumiced and randomly divided into two groups of 20 teeth. Metal orthodontic brackets were bonded to the enamel surface by one of two protocols: 37% phosphoric acid with a composite adhesive (Transbond XT) or a nonrinse conditioner with a compomer adhesive (Dyract flow). The teeth were mounted in phenolic rings and stored in deionized water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours. A Zwick Universal Testing Machine was used to determine shear bond strengths in MegaPascals. The residual adhesive on the enamel surface was evaluated using the Adhesive Remnant Index. Student t-test and chi2-test were used to compare the two groups. Significance was predetermined at P < or = .05. The results of the t-tests indicated that there were significant differences between the two adhesive systems (t = 11.18 and P = .001) with the nonrinse conditioner/compomer system having lower shear bond strength (X = 1.7 +/- 0.9 MPa) than the phosphoric acid/composite adhesive (X = 10.4 +/- 2.8 MPa). The results of the Chi Square test evaluating the residual adhesives on the enamel surfaces also revealed significant differences between the two groups (chi2 = 7.62, P = .022). In conclusion, a nonrinse conditioner used with a compomer adhesive had significantly lower shear bond strength than a phosphoric acid/composite adhesive system.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]