Bond strength with custom base indirect bonding techniques.
Standard
Bond strength with custom base indirect bonding techniques. / Klocke, Arndt; Shi, Jianmin; Kahl-Nieke, Bärbel; Bismayer, Ulrich.
In: ANGLE ORTHOD, Vol. 73, No. 2, 2, 2003, p. 176-180.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Bond strength with custom base indirect bonding techniques.
AU - Klocke, Arndt
AU - Shi, Jianmin
AU - Kahl-Nieke, Bärbel
AU - Bismayer, Ulrich
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - Different types of adhesives for indirect bonding techniques have been introduced recently. But there is limited information regarding bond strength with these new materials. In this in vitro investigation, stainless steel brackets were bonded to 100 permanent bovine incisors using the Thomas technique, the modified Thomas technique, and light-cured direct bonding for a control group. The following five groups of 20 teeth each were formed: (1) modified Thomas technique with thermally cured base composite (Therma Cure) and chemically cured sealant (Maximum Cure), (2) Thomas technique with thermally cured base composite (Therma Cure) and chemically cured sealant (Custom I Q), (3) Thomas technique with light-cured base composite (Transbond XT) and chemically cured sealant (Sondhi Rapid Set), (4) modified Thomas technique with chemically cured base adhesive (Phase II) and chemically cured sealant (Maximum Cure), and (5) control group directly bonded with light-cured adhesive (Transbond XT). Mean bond strengths in groups 3, 4, and 5 were 14.99 +/- 2.85, 15.41 +/- 3.21, and 13.88 +/- 2.33 MPa, respectively, and these groups were not significantly different from each other. Groups 1 (mean bond strength 7.28 +/- 4.88 MPa) and 2 (mean bond strength 7.07 +/- 4.11 MPa) showed significantly lower bond strengths than groups 3, 4, and 5 and a higher probability of bond failure. Both the original (group 2) and the modified (group 1) Thomas technique were able to achieve bond strengths comparable to the light-cured direct bonded control group.
AB - Different types of adhesives for indirect bonding techniques have been introduced recently. But there is limited information regarding bond strength with these new materials. In this in vitro investigation, stainless steel brackets were bonded to 100 permanent bovine incisors using the Thomas technique, the modified Thomas technique, and light-cured direct bonding for a control group. The following five groups of 20 teeth each were formed: (1) modified Thomas technique with thermally cured base composite (Therma Cure) and chemically cured sealant (Maximum Cure), (2) Thomas technique with thermally cured base composite (Therma Cure) and chemically cured sealant (Custom I Q), (3) Thomas technique with light-cured base composite (Transbond XT) and chemically cured sealant (Sondhi Rapid Set), (4) modified Thomas technique with chemically cured base adhesive (Phase II) and chemically cured sealant (Maximum Cure), and (5) control group directly bonded with light-cured adhesive (Transbond XT). Mean bond strengths in groups 3, 4, and 5 were 14.99 +/- 2.85, 15.41 +/- 3.21, and 13.88 +/- 2.33 MPa, respectively, and these groups were not significantly different from each other. Groups 1 (mean bond strength 7.28 +/- 4.88 MPa) and 2 (mean bond strength 7.07 +/- 4.11 MPa) showed significantly lower bond strengths than groups 3, 4, and 5 and a higher probability of bond failure. Both the original (group 2) and the modified (group 1) Thomas technique were able to achieve bond strengths comparable to the light-cured direct bonded control group.
M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz
VL - 73
SP - 176
EP - 180
JO - ANGLE ORTHOD
JF - ANGLE ORTHOD
SN - 0003-3219
IS - 2
M1 - 2
ER -
