Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of different enamel preparation procedures and compare light cure composite (LCC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) on the bond strength of orthodontic metal tubes rebonded to the enamel. Twenty human molars were divided into two groups (n=...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Monika Aleksiejunaite, Antanas Sidlauskas, Arunas Vasiliauskas
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2017-01-01
Series:International Journal of Dentistry
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8415979
id doaj-4acf21b516a84ca6bb7a5c9bfdeb617f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4acf21b516a84ca6bb7a5c9bfdeb617f2020-11-24T22:06:33ZengHindawi LimitedInternational Journal of Dentistry1687-87281687-87362017-01-01201710.1155/2017/84159798415979Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In VitroMonika Aleksiejunaite0Antanas Sidlauskas1Arunas Vasiliauskas2Clinic of Orthodontics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lukšos, Daumanto St. 6, LT-50106 Kaunas, LithuaniaClinic of Orthodontics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lukšos, Daumanto St. 6, LT-50106 Kaunas, LithuaniaClinic of Orthodontics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lukšos, Daumanto St. 6, LT-50106 Kaunas, LithuaniaThe purpose of this study was to determine the impact of different enamel preparation procedures and compare light cure composite (LCC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) on the bond strength of orthodontic metal tubes rebonded to the enamel. Twenty human molars were divided into two groups (n=10). Tubes were bonded using LCC (Transbond XT) in group 1 and RMGI (Fuji Ortho LC) in group 2. The tubes in each group were bonded following manufacturers’ instructions (experiment I) and then debonded using testing machine. Then, the same brackets were sandblasted and rebonded twice. Before the first rebonding, the enamel was cleaned using carbide bur (experiment II) and before second rebonding, it was cleaned using carbide bur and soda blasted (experiment III). Mann–Whitney and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed no significant difference between RMGI and LCC bond strengths in case of normal bonding and rebonding, when enamel was cleaned using carbide bur before rebonding. Enamel soda blasting before rebonding significantly increased RMGI tensile bond strength value compared to LLC (p<0.05). LCC and RMGI (especially RMGI) provide sufficient bond strengths for rebonding of molar tubes, when residual adhesive from previous bonding is removed and enamel soda blasted.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8415979
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Monika Aleksiejunaite
Antanas Sidlauskas
Arunas Vasiliauskas
spellingShingle Monika Aleksiejunaite
Antanas Sidlauskas
Arunas Vasiliauskas
Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
International Journal of Dentistry
author_facet Monika Aleksiejunaite
Antanas Sidlauskas
Arunas Vasiliauskas
author_sort Monika Aleksiejunaite
title Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
title_short Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
title_full Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
title_fullStr Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Rebonding on the Bond Strength of Orthodontic Tubes: A Comparison of Light Cure Adhesive and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement In Vitro
title_sort effect of rebonding on the bond strength of orthodontic tubes: a comparison of light cure adhesive and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in vitro
publisher Hindawi Limited
series International Journal of Dentistry
issn 1687-8728
1687-8736
publishDate 2017-01-01
description The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of different enamel preparation procedures and compare light cure composite (LCC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) on the bond strength of orthodontic metal tubes rebonded to the enamel. Twenty human molars were divided into two groups (n=10). Tubes were bonded using LCC (Transbond XT) in group 1 and RMGI (Fuji Ortho LC) in group 2. The tubes in each group were bonded following manufacturers’ instructions (experiment I) and then debonded using testing machine. Then, the same brackets were sandblasted and rebonded twice. Before the first rebonding, the enamel was cleaned using carbide bur (experiment II) and before second rebonding, it was cleaned using carbide bur and soda blasted (experiment III). Mann–Whitney and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests showed no significant difference between RMGI and LCC bond strengths in case of normal bonding and rebonding, when enamel was cleaned using carbide bur before rebonding. Enamel soda blasting before rebonding significantly increased RMGI tensile bond strength value compared to LLC (p<0.05). LCC and RMGI (especially RMGI) provide sufficient bond strengths for rebonding of molar tubes, when residual adhesive from previous bonding is removed and enamel soda blasted.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8415979
work_keys_str_mv AT monikaaleksiejunaite effectofrebondingonthebondstrengthoforthodontictubesacomparisonoflightcureadhesiveandresinmodifiedglassionomercementinvitro
AT antanassidlauskas effectofrebondingonthebondstrengthoforthodontictubesacomparisonoflightcureadhesiveandresinmodifiedglassionomercementinvitro
AT arunasvasiliauskas effectofrebondingonthebondstrengthoforthodontictubesacomparisonoflightcureadhesiveandresinmodifiedglassionomercementinvitro
_version_ 1725823283462406144