Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Adhesive Remnant Index of Two Different Primers in Dry and Wet Conditions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8695.2023.11.05Keywords:
Shearbond strength, Adhesive remnant index, Transbond XT, Assure Plus, Transbond MIPAbstract
Purpose: To assess the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index score (ARI) of different primers in dry condition and in wet conditions.
Materials and Methods: A total of 80 human premolars which are free from caries, cracks, and fine lines were collected and mounted on acrylic. These teeth were randomly distributed into two groups (Assure Plus and Transbond XT/MIP). Each group was again reassigned into two subgroups (dry and wet) with 20 teeth in each subgroup based on the primer used and enamel surface after etching (Contaminated or Non contaminated). All teeth bonded were then stored in separate glasses containing distilled water for seven days at 37 0C. Universal testing machine was used to measure the SBS by applying 50 kg of force at 0.5 mm/min. The adhesive remnant index was assessed by using a stereomicroscope.
Results: There is no statistically significant difference in shear bond strength of Assure plus and Transbond XT bonded in dry conditions. Among the four subgroups, Assure Plus on wet teeth showed the high bond strength (12.63 ± 6.64 Mpa). There is a statistically significant difference in ARI scores between Assure Plus and Transbond MIP bonded in wet conditions (P<0.001).
Conclusion: On moisture contaminated teeth, Assure Plus showed higher bond strength than Transbond MIP. Transbond MIP has the least bond strength among all, but the bond strength is adequate to withstand the masticatory forces.
References
Tavas MA, Watts DC. Bonding of orthodontic brackets by transillumination of a light activated composite: An in vitro study. Br J Orthod 1979; 6: 207-8. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.6.4.207
Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res. 1955; 34: 849-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345550340060801
Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod. 1975; 2: 171-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/0301228X.1975.11743666
Zachrisson BJ. A post treatment evaluation of direct bonding in orthodontics. Am J Orthod. 1977; 71: 173-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(77)90394-3
Silverstone LM. State of the art on sealant research and priorities for further research. J Dent Educ 1984; 48: 107-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.1984.48.2.tb01744.x
Hormati AA, Fuller JL, Denehy GE. Effects of contamination and mechanical disturbance on the quality of acid etched enamel. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980; 100:34-8. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1980.0033
Cobo JM, Moro JM. Hydrophilic adhesive for bonding to impacted canines. J Clin Orthod. 1994; 28: 600.
Miller RA. Wet field bonding in the 21st century. Orthod Prospect J. 1998; 2: 3‑4.
Hobson RS, Ledvinka J, Meechan JG. The effect of moisture and blood contamination on bond strength of a new orthodontic bonding material. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 120: 54‑7. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.115037
Itoh T, Fukushima T, Inoue Y, Arita S, Miyazaki K. Effect of water, saliva and blood contamination on bonding of metal brackets with a 4‑META/ MMA/TBB resin to etched enamel. Am J Dent. 1999; 12: 299‑304. PMID: 10850251.
Vicente A, Mena A, Ortiz AJ, Bravo LA. Water and saliva contamination effect on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with a moisture-tolerant light cure system. Angle Orthod. 2009 Jan; 79(1): 127-32. https://doi.org/10.2319/012208-37.1
Rix D, Foley TF, Mamandras A. Comparison of bond strength of three adhesives: composite resin, hybrid GIC, and glass-filled GIC. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 36-42. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.110519
Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trails with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod. 1984; 85(4): 333-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90190-8
Mehmet Oguz Öztoprak, Fulya Isik, Korkmaz Sayınsu, Tulin Arun, and Bulent Aydemir. Effect of blood and saliva contamination on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with 4 adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131: 238-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.035
Coreil MN, McInnes‑Ledoux P, Ledoux WR, Weinberg R. Shear bond strength of four orthodontic bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990; 97: 126‑9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70085-Q
Fajen VB, Duncanson MG Jr, Nanda RS, Currier GF, Angolkar PV. An Invitro evaluation of bond strength of three glass ionomer cements: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990; 97: 316‑22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70104-K
McCourt JW, Cooley RL, Barnwell S. Light‑cure bracket adhesives. J Clin Orthod. 1991; 27:209‑13.
Fox NA, McCabe JF, Buckley JG. A critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1994; 21:33-43. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.21.1.33
Meehan MP, Foley TF, Mamandras AH. A comparison of the shear bond strengths of two glass ionomer cements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115: 125‑32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70338-0
Vittorio Cacciafesta, Maria Francesca Sfondrini, Marco De Angelis, Andrea Scribante, and Catherine Klersy. Effect of water and saliva contamination on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with conventional, hydrophilic, and self-etching primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123: 633-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00198-7
Hajrassie MK, Khier SE. In‑vivo and in‑vitro comparison of bond strengths of orthodontic brackets bonded to enamel and debonded at various times. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131: 384‑90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.025
Eliades T, Brantley WA. The inappropriateness of conventional orthodontic bond strength assessment protocols. Eur J Orthod. 2000; 22: 13‑23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/22.1.13
Mandava Prasad, Shamil Mohamed, Krishna Nayak, Sharath Kumar Shetty, Ashok Kumar Talapaneni. Effect of moisture, saliva, and blood contamination on the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with a conventional bonding system and self-etched bonding system. Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine. 2014; 5: 123-129. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.127305
Mohammad Hossein Toodehzaeim, Alireza Haerian, Isa Safari and Rahele Arjmandi. The effect of assure plus resin on the shear bond strength of metal brackets bonded to enamel and surface of porcelain and amalgam restorations. Biosci. Biotech. Res. Comm 2017; 10: 82-87. https://doi.org/10.21786/bbrc/10.2/14
Ram Kumar Grandhi, Edward Charles Combe, and Thomas Michael Speidel. Shear bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets with a moisture-insensitive primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 251-5. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.110988
Shane Schaneveldt and Timothy F. Foley. Bond strength comparison of moisture insensitive primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 122: 267-73. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.126594
Benjamin R. Nemeth, William Wiltshire, and Christopher L. Lavelle. Shear/peel bond strength of orthodontic attachments to moist and dry enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129: 396-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.12.017
O'Brien KD, Watts DC, Read MJ. Residual debris and bond strength-Is there a relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 94: 222-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(88)90031-5
Kumaraswamy Anand M, Kaberi Majumder, Sundaram Venkateswaran, Rengarajan Krishnaswamy N. Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded using two different hydrophilic primers: An in vitro study. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2014; 25: 191-196. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.135919
Juliana Fernandes de Morais et al. Shear Bond Strength and Adhesive Remnant of Three Protocols used for Bonding Orthodontic Brackets. Brazilian Research in Pediatric Dentistry and Integrated Clinic. 2016; 16: 433-440. https://doi.org/10.4034/PBOCI.2016.161.45
M.G. Buonocore. Retrospectives on Bonding. Dental Clinics of North America.1981; 25: 241-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-8532(22)02806-3
