Althagafi Nebras Mohammed
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, AlMadinah AlMunawwarah, Saudi Arabia.
J Orthod Sci. 2022 Jan 28;11:3. doi: 10.4103/jos.jos_139_21. eCollection 2022.
To assess the impact of enamel surface treatment protocols and the types of adhesive materials on the shear bond strength (SBS) of brackets to eroded enamel substrate.
Eighty extracted premolars were randomly assigned to four main groups in which group C (no treatment) was the control group. The remaining groups were exposed to an erosion challenge through short-term acidic exposure to HCl solution (0.01 M, pH 2.3) for 30 s, with an agitation speed of 50 rpm at an environmental temperature of 25°C. The eroded enamel surface within each group was treated as follows: group N received no treatment; in group P, the eroded enamel was treated with 35% phosphoric acid (Ultradent Products, South Jordan, UT, USA) for 15 s, followed by a rinse for 10 s; and in group F, the eroded enamel was treated with fluoride gel (Bifluorid 12; Voco-GmbH, Cuxhaven, Germany) for 4 min. The brackets were bonded with either a resin composite adhesive (Transbond XT; light-cure adhesive, 3M Unitek, CA, USA) or resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Ortho LC-GC Corporation, Japan). The specimens were tested for SBS, and the bond failure was assessed according to the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post-hoc tests ( < 0.05) were used to compare the SBS of the groups. The ARI values between the groups were recorded.
Statistically significant differences were found among the tested variables ( < 0.05). Group P showed the highest mean SBS values regardless of the type of adhesive used, and the difference was statistically significant ( < 0.05). The application of the fluoride gel showed no statistically significant improvement in SBS values. The failure mode distribution among the test groups indicated that failures at the adhesive-bracket interface were predominant in group C compared with the other study groups.
Fluoride pretreatment, which was used to remineralize the eroded enamel surfaces before bonding, resulted in a decrease in the SBS of the orthodontic brackets compared with the other treated groups. The use of fluoride-releasing adhesive also enhances bonding to the eroded enamel surfaces.
评估牙釉质表面处理方案和粘结材料类型对正畸托槽与侵蚀牙釉质基底之间剪切粘结强度(SBS)的影响。
80颗拔除的前磨牙随机分为四个主要组,其中C组(未处理)为对照组。其余各组通过在25°C环境温度下以50 rpm的搅拌速度短期暴露于HCl溶液(0.01 M,pH 2.3)30 s进行侵蚀挑战。每组内侵蚀的牙釉质表面处理如下:N组未处理;P组用35%磷酸(美国犹他州南乔丹市Ultradent Products公司)处理侵蚀的牙釉质15 s,然后冲洗10 s;F组用氟凝胶(德国库克斯港Voco-GmbH公司的Bifluorid 12)处理侵蚀的牙釉质4 min。托槽用树脂复合粘结剂(Transbond XT;光固化粘结剂,美国加利福尼亚州3M Unitek公司)或树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(日本富士正畸LC-GC公司)粘结。对标本进行SBS测试,并根据粘结剂残留指数(ARI)评估粘结失败情况。采用方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey事后检验(<0.05)比较各组的SBS。记录各组之间的ARI值。
在测试变量之间发现有统计学显著差异(<0.05)。无论使用何种粘结剂类型,P组均显示出最高的平均SBS值,且差异具有统计学显著性(<0.05)。氟凝胶的应用在SBS值方面未显示出统计学显著改善。测试组之间的失败模式分布表明,与其他研究组相比,C组在粘结剂-托槽界面处的失败占主导。
与其他处理组相比,在粘结前用于使侵蚀牙釉质表面再矿化的氟化物预处理导致正畸托槽的SBS降低。使用含氟粘结剂也增强了与侵蚀牙釉质表面的粘结。