Eine vergleichende In-vitro-Studie zur Haftfestigkeit von mit Kleber vorbeschichteten und nicht vorbeschichteten Brackets

Zusammenfassung

In dieser Arbeit wurde die Haftfestigkeit vorbeschichteter Brackets mit Brackets, bei denen der Kleber erst beim Bonding auf die Bracketbasis aufgebracht wird, verglichen. Die Haftfestigkeit der geklebten Brackets am Schmelz wurde mittels Abscherversuche mit einer Instronmessmaschine (Vorschubgeschwindigkeit 0,5 mm/Min) ermittelt und der am Schmelz verbliebene Kleberanteil mit dem modifizierten Adhesive Remnant Index=ARI (Stereomikroskop der Fa. Zeiss) bestimmt. Die Auswertung erfolgte mit dem SPSS-Programm. Beim Vergleich zweier Mittelwerte wurde der T-Test für unabhängige Stichproben angewandt und das Signifikanzniveau auf p<0,05 festgelegt. In beiden Gruppen konnte die von Reynolds geforderte Mindesthaftfestigkeit von 5–8 MPa erreicht werden, einen signifikanten Unterschied gab es nur bei den Unterkieferfrontzähnen. ARI-Index: In 20 von 30 Fällen blieb in der Gruppe ohne Kleberbeschichtung>90% des Klebers auf der Schmelzoberfläche. Das APC System zeigte auch ein ähnliches Frakturmuster, dennoch war ein etwas besserer Verbund Kleber / Bracketbasis zu erkennen.

Abstract

In this study, the bond strength of adhesive precoated brackets was compared to brackets without adhesive coating using the conventional bonding method.

Shear testing was performed with the universal mechanical testing machine at a feed rate of 0.5 mm/min and ARI Index was determined by stereo microscope (10–66 fold magnification). Statistical analysis was carried out using the SPSS program. The level of significance was established at p<0.05. The T-Test for independent random samples was employed when comparing two mean values.

Both groups achieved the minimum bond strength of 5–8 MPa and there was only a significant difference between the lower incisors groups.

ARI: In 20 of 30 cases in the bracket group without adhesive coating>90% of the composite remained on the enamel. The APC System also showed this fracture mode but a smaller tendency towards bracket-adhesion failure was recognizable.

Schlüsselwörter

Haftfestigkeit - klebervorbeschichtete Brackets - Restkleber Index

Key words

bond strength - adhesive precoated brackets - Adhesive Remnant Index [ARI]

Publication History

Article published online:
05 October 2023

• Literatur

• 1 Eller B, Plenk H. Grundlagen und derzeitiger Stand der Schmelzätzungs– und Bracketklebetechniken; Zeitschrift Stomatologie 94 8: 385-397
• 2 Dart EC, Nemcock J. Photopolymerisable composition having as catalyst alpha diketon and a reducing agent, e.g. DMAEM, British patent 1971; 408: 265
• 3 Jonke E, Freudenthaler JW, Bollschweiler S, Tripolt H, Bantleon HP. Vergleichende Untersuchung der Haftfähigkeit von neuen lichthärtenden und chemisch härtenden Klebesystemen in der Kieferorthopädie Stomatologie 1996; 2: 39-43
• 4 Greenlaw R, Way DC, Galil KA. An in vitro evaluation of a visible light-cured resin as an alternative to conventional resin bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 96: 214-20
• 5 Galindo HRA, Sadowsky PL, Vlachos C, Jakobson A, Wallace D. An in vivo comparison between a visible light-cured bonding system and a chemically cured bonding system. American Journal of Orthodotontics and orofacial Orthopedics 1998; 113: 271-5
• 6 Silverman E, Cohen M. Bonding with a Plasma-Arc Curing Light and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer. J Clin Orthod 2000; 34: 233-235
• 7 Oliver RG. The effect of different methods of bracket removal on the amount of residual adhesive. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1988; 93: 196-200
• 8 Manzo P, Liistro G, De Clerck H. Clinical trial comparing plasma arc and conventional Halogen curing lights for orthodontic bonding. American Journal of Orthodontics and dentofacial Orthopedics 2004; 125: 30-35
• 9 Lippitz JS, Robert N, Jacobsen JR. In vitro study of 24-hour and 30-day shear bond strengths of three resin-glass ionomer cements used to bond orthodontic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998; 113: 620-624
• 10 Graf BE. Jacobi Bond strength of various fluoride-releasing orthodontic bonding systems. Experimantal study. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics 2000; 61: 191-198
• 11 Jobalia SB, Valente RM, de Rijk WG, BeGole EA, Evans CA. Bond strength of visible light-cured glass ionomer othodontic cement. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1997; 112: 205-208
• 12 Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. British Journal of Orthodontics 1975; 3: 171-178
• 13 Oliver RG. The effect of different methods of bracket removal on the amount of residual adhesive. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1988; 93: 196-200
• 14 Årtun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. American Journal of Orthodontics 1984; 85: 333-340
• 15 Wendl B, Droschl H, Kern W. Comparative study of polymerization lamps of various technologies by determining the degree of curing of composite samples using infrared spectroscopy. European Journal of Orthodontics 2004; 26: 545-551
• 16 Velo A. Carano Carano A. Self etching vs. traditional bonding systems in orthodontics: an in vitro study. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research. 2002 5. 166-8
• 17 Miller RA. The Laboratory and Clinical Evaluation of a New 6th Generation Self-Etching Primer in Orthodontics. JClin Orthod 2001; 35: 42-5
• 18 Larmour CJ. An ex vivo assessment of a bonding technique using a self-etching primer. Journal of Orthodontics 2003; 30: 225-228
• 19 Diedrich P. Enamel alterations from bracket bonding and debonding; a study with the scanning electron microscope. American Journal of Orthodontics 1981; 79: 500-522
• 20 Ødegaard J, Segner D. The use of visible light curing composites in bonding ceramic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1990; 97: 188-193
• 21 Akl Roula, Ghoubril Joseph, Le Gall Michel, Shatila Rania, Philip-Alliez Camille. Evaluation of shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index of metal APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system: A comparative in vitro study with APC™ II and uncoated metal brackets. Int Orthod 2022; 20: 100705