de Resende Isabella-Saraiva-Leão, Cunha Diana-Araújo, Silva Paulo-Goberlânio-de Barros, Damasceno Juliana-Ximenes, Aragão Lara-Rabelo, Vieira-Meyer Anya-Pimentel-Gomes-Fernandes, Neri Jiovanne-Rabelo
Master of Dental Sciences, University Center Christus (Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil).
J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Feb 1;16(2):e178-e185. doi: 10.4317/jced.61247. eCollection 2024 Feb.
Universal adhesive systems used for restorative clinical procedures are like orthodontics and may be a viable option. This study evaluated the effectiveness of universal adhesive systems in enhancing the durability of the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of orthodontic brackets to enamel.
100 bovine incisors were divided into five groups (n=20), according to the applied adhesive systems: Primer Transbond XT; Ambar; Ambar Universal; Single Bond Universal; Adper Single Bond 2. Bracket from each tooth were submitted to SBS test after 24 hours, and 12 months later. The amount of remaining adhesive was evaluated through ARI.
After 24 hours, there was no difference in BS between the control and the other groups (p>0.05). However, there were difference between TOTALETCHING1 group and the Ambar Universal (=0.015) and Single Bond Universal groups (=0.011). After 12 months, Primer Transbond XT, Ambar, Ambar Universal and Adper Single Bond 2 showed no differences in the SBS (>0.05). Nonetheless, Single Bond Universal presented superior result when compared to Primer Transbond XT (=0.046) and Ambar (=0.011) groups. The SBS of all groups reduced significantly after 12 months (<0.05). There was no difference between ARI scores in each individually assessed group (>0.05), for both periods. Following 24 hours, a difference was observed between the groups (=0.043), fact that didn't occur after 12 months (=0.109).
Adhesive systems, such as Ambar Universal and Single Bond Universal are efficient in bonding orthodontic brackets to enamel when associated with Transbond XT adhesive paste. Bond strength; Primer Transbond XT, orthodontic brackets, adhesive systems.
用于修复临床操作的通用粘结系统类似于正畸领域，可能是一种可行的选择。本研究评估了通用粘结系统在提高正畸托槽与牙釉质之间的剪切粘结强度（SBS）和粘结剂残留指数（ARI）耐久性方面的有效性。
根据所应用的粘结系统，将100颗牛切牙分为五组（n = 20）：Transbond XT底漆；安巴尔；安巴尔通用型；单键通用型；Adper单键2型。每颗牙齿上的托槽在24小时后以及12个月后进行SBS测试。通过ARI评估剩余粘结剂的量。
24小时后，对照组与其他组之间的粘结强度无差异（p>0.05）。然而，全酸蚀1组与安巴尔通用型组（=0.015）和单键通用型组（=0.011）之间存在差异。12个月后，Transbond XT底漆、安巴尔、安巴尔通用型和Adper单键2型在SBS方面无差异（>0.05）。尽管如此，与Transbond XT底漆组（=0.046）和安巴尔组（=0.011）相比，单键通用型表现出更好的结果。12个月后，所有组的SBS均显著降低（<0.05）。在两个时间段内，各单独评估组的ARI评分之间均无差异（>0.05）。24小时后，组间观察到差异（=0.043），而12个月后未出现这种差异（=0.109）。
当与Transbond XT粘结剂糊剂联合使用时，安巴尔通用型和单键通用型等粘结系统在将正畸托槽粘结到牙釉质方面是有效的。粘结强度；Transbond XT底漆；正畸托槽；粘结系统。
