Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, KM Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Vadodara, Gujarat, India, Phone: +91 9893985437, e-mail:
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, KM Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2022 Feb 1;23(2):193-201.
A major limitation of indirect bonding is incomplete penetration of the curing light through transfer trays, leading to inadequate curing of light-cure adhesive resin, causing bracket bond failure. Dual-cure adhesive resin is both light and chemically cured, which reduces the requirement of light for curing of the composite. Comparative evaluation of bracket failure rate and bond strength between dual-cure composite and light-cure composite for indirect orthodontic bonding of brackets.
A split-mouth randomized clinical study was carried out in 51 patients (30 females and 21 males). Indirect orthodontic bonding using Erkogum as adhesive to attach the bracket to cast and glue gun material was utilized to form a transfer tray. Conventional light-cure and dual-cure adhesive resins were compared with regard to their bracket failure rate, adhesive remnant index score, and clinical bond strength.
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was employed to test the normality of data. Mann-Whitney test and Chi-square test were performed for the quantitative variables and it was observed that both the groups showed similar results for the parameters being measured. The mandibular arch showed more bracket failure, the dual-cure composite group showed more bracket failure, however, the adhesive remnant index (ARI) score for both the groups was similar. No statistically significant difference was seen concerning the clinical bond strength between the two adhesive resins.
Dual-cure adhesive system can be used for indirect bonding in orthodontics. The mandibular arch had a higher bond failure in the second premolar region. The sequence of bond failure was concordant among both the adhesive groups. However, dual-cure adhesive invariably showed more bracket failure. The highest bond strength was observed for the maxillary canine brackets in the light-cure group, and mandibular canine brackets in the dual-cure group. Whereas, the weakest bond strength in the light-cure group was observed for the mandibular second premolar brackets and for maxillary second premolar brackets in the dual-cure group. There was no significant difference between the clinical bond strength between the two adhesive systems. On debonding, majority of the adhesive was observed to be on the tooth surface.
This study signifies that both light-cure and dual-cure resins can be used for indirect bonding procedures but light-cure composite resin shows a lower bracket failure rate as compared to dual-cure composite resin.
间接粘接的一个主要限制是固化光不能完全穿透转移托盘，从而导致光固化胶粘剂的固化不充分，导致托槽粘接失败。双固化胶粘剂既受光固化，又受化学固化，这降低了复合材料固化对光的要求。比较双固化复合树脂和光固化复合树脂用于间接正畸托槽粘接的托槽脱落率和粘接强度。
对 51 名患者（30 名女性和 21 名男性）进行了一项分口随机临床试验。使用 Erkogum 作为胶粘剂将托槽粘接到铸型上，并使用胶枪材料形成转移托盘，进行间接正畸粘接。比较了常规光固化和双固化胶粘剂在托槽脱落率、粘接残留指数评分和临床粘接强度方面的差异。
采用 Kolmogorov-Smirnov 检验检验数据的正态性。对定量变量进行了 Mann-Whitney 检验和卡方检验，结果表明两组在测量参数上均有相似的结果。下颌弓的托槽脱落率更高，双固化复合树脂组的托槽脱落率更高，但两组的粘接残留指数（ARI）评分相似。两种胶粘剂的临床粘接强度无统计学差异。
双固化粘接系统可用于正畸间接粘接。下颌弓第二前磨牙区的粘结失败率较高。两种粘接剂组的粘结失败顺序一致。然而，双固化胶粘剂总是显示出更高的托槽脱落率。光固化组上颌尖牙托槽的粘接强度最高，双固化组下颌尖牙托槽的粘接强度最高。光固化组下颌第二前磨牙托槽和双固化组上颌第二前磨牙托槽的粘接强度最低。两种粘接系统的临床粘接强度无显著差异。在脱粘时，观察到大部分胶粘剂在牙齿表面。
本研究表明，光固化和双固化树脂均可用于间接粘接程序，但光固化复合树脂的托槽脱落率低于双固化复合树脂。
