|
|
||||||||
Scientific Section |


* Departments of Dental Health and Development and
Basic Dental Science, University of Wales College of Medicine, Dental School, Heath Park, Cardiff CF4 4XY, UK
Abstract
The objectives of the study were to isolate the bracketcement interface, and to determine the influence of bracket base morphology and orthodontic bonding agent chosen on strength of adhesion.
The bracket bases evaluated included 60, 80, and 100 single mesh bases, a double mesh base, and the DynalockTM, and Mini TwinTM bases. The strength of interface provided by each of these bases with ConciseTM, TransbondTM, Right OnTM, and non-encapsulated Fuji Ortho LCTM cements, was measured in tension and recorded in Mega Pascals.
The single-mesh bases performed well with either Concise or Right On (11882272 MPa) and, other than the 80-mesh bracket, relatively poorly with Transbond (218515 MPa). With Fuji Ortho LC, the single mesh bases performed well (6051219 MPa). The double mesh base performed well with Right On (1375 MPa), and reasonably well with Concise, Transbond, and Fuji Ortho LC (600920 MPa). The Dynalock and Mini Twin Bases performed fairly well with all cements (8871716 MPa).
It was concluded that the orthodontic bonding agent selected would appear to largely determine the bond strength achieved with a particular bracket base design. A definite trend was difficult to identify in this study, and it appeared that certain combinations of bracket base and bonding agent performed optimally. Particular base designs may allow improved adhesive penetration or improved penetration of curing light. Alternatively, the dimension and distribution of resin/cement tags prescribed by one base could promote a stress distribution that is better resisted by a particular adhesive.
Key words: Orthodontic Bracket, Bonding Agent, Bond Strength
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Banks and T. V. Macfarlane Bonded versus banded first molar attachments: a randomized controlled clinical trial J. Orthod., June 1, 2007; 34(2): 128 - 136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |