Anand M Kumaraswamy, Majumder Kaberi, Venkateswaran Sundaram, Krishnaswamy N Rengarajan
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Ragas Dental College and Hospital, The Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Indian J Dent Res. 2014 Mar-Apr;25(2):191-6. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.135919.
Salivary control and maintenance of a dry operating field is a prime requisite of orthodontic bonding. Moisture insensitive primer (MIP) with a clinical significant bond strength values have a better edge over the conventional hydrophobic bonding systems.
The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of two hydrophilic primers with respect to conventional hydrophobic primer by comparing their shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive-failure locations after contamination with saliva and saliva substitute.
A total of 150 extracted human premolars were randomly divided into five groups; Group A (Transbond MIP/saliva substitute), Group B (Opal Primo/saliva substitute), Group C (Transbond MIP/natural saliva), Group D (Opal Primo/natural saliva), control group - Group E (Transbond XT/dry), adhesive-Transbond XT used for all five groups and bonded using stainless steel brackets. Shear forces were applied to the samples with a universal testing machine. SBSs was measured in megapascals. The mode of bond failure was determined using the adhesive remnant index (ARI).
The mean SBS produced by Transbond MIP was higher than Opal Primo, which was statistically significant according to one-way analysis of variance. Both the tested groups showed lesser bond strength values than Transbond XT (the control). ARI scores revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in the site of bond failure between study groups. ARI scores were found to be lower for study groups suggesting adhesive failure, compared to higher ARI scores for the control group suggesting cohesive failure.
Transbond XT adhesive with Transbond MIP or Opal Primo have clinically acceptable bond strength in wet fields. Opal Primo is a viable option to use as a hydrophilic primer clinically.
唾液控制和保持手术区域干燥是正畸粘结的首要要求。具有临床显著粘结强度值的湿度不敏感底漆(MIP)比传统的疏水粘结系统具有更好的优势。
本研究的目的是通过比较两种亲水底漆与传统疏水底漆在被唾液和唾液替代品污染后的剪切粘结强度(SBS)和粘结失败位置,来研究它们的有效性。
总共150颗拔除的人类前磨牙被随机分为五组;A组(Transbond MIP/唾液替代品),B组(Opal Primo/唾液替代品),C组(Transbond MIP/天然唾液),D组(Opal Primo/天然唾液),对照组 - E组(Transbond XT/干燥),所有五组均使用粘结剂Transbond XT并使用不锈钢托槽进行粘结。用万能试验机对样品施加剪切力。SBS以兆帕为单位进行测量。使用粘结残余指数(ARI)确定粘结失败的模式。
根据单因素方差分析,Transbond MIP产生的平均SBS高于Opal Primo,具有统计学意义。两个测试组的粘结强度值均低于Transbond XT(对照组)。ARI评分显示,研究组之间粘结失败的部位没有统计学上的显著差异。与对照组较高的ARI评分表明内聚破坏相比,研究组的ARI评分较低,表明粘结破坏。
Transbond XT粘结剂与Transbond MIP或Opal Primo在潮湿环境中具有临床上可接受的粘结强度。Opal Primo在临床上作为亲水底漆是一个可行的选择。