Issues‎ > ‎SDJ, Vol.4, No.1, 2017‎ > ‎

sdj-10070

Evaluation of Different Enamel Surface Treatment on the Bracket Bonding
Bayan A. Hassan  and Mansour H. Mohammed

Orthodontic department, College of Dentistry, Hawler Medical University, Erbil, Iraq.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate and compare the effects of different enamel conditioning techniques on the shear bond strength of brackets, the failure sites following debonding and the surface morphology of the enamel. 

Methods: In this study, 72 human premolars were randomly divided into six groups of 12 specimens each. The enamel surfaces of the teeth were etched with 37% phosphoric acid in group PA, deproteinized using sodium hypochlorite and 37% phosphoric acid in group NaOCl + PA, sandblasted and etched with 37% phosphoric acid in group AA + PA, conditioned by self-etching primer in group TPSEP, deproteinized using sodium hypochlorite and conditioned by self-etching primer in group NaOCl +TPSEP, sandblasted and conditioned by self-etching primer in group AA + TPSEP. After enamel conditioning procedures, brackets were bonded to the treated enamel surface, and shear bonding test was performed. After deboning, ARI scores were calculated for all groups. Two samples from each group before bonding procedure were inspected by SEM to study the surface topography of enamel following different conditioning techniques. Data were subjected to analysis of One-way variance, Scheff post hoc, Chi-square and Spearman’s tests.       

Results: The mean bond strength values for groups NaOCl and PA have a higher mean shear bond strength among other groups while self-etching primer in group TPSEP had a lower shear bond strength. A significant difference was observed in the bond strengths between groups (p < 0.001). However, non-significant difference found in ARI in all groups (P = 0.118).SEM observation revealed different etching patterns on the enamel surface after pretreatment.

Conclusions: Enamel surface pretreatments, using a combination of sodium hypochlorite or sandblasting before phosphoric acid and self-etching primer, result in increased shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets as well as the surface roughness of enamel.

Keywords: Sandblasting, Sodium hypochlorite, Shear Bond strength, Electron microscope.

References:

1. Proffit WR, and Fields H. Malocclusion and dentofacial deformity in contemporary society. Contemporary Orthodontics. 2000.2da. ed. St. Louis: Mosby 

2. Bishara SE, VonWald L, Laffoon JF, Warren JJ. Effect of a self-etch primer/adhesive on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;119(6):621-4.

3. Grubisa HS, Heo G, Raboud D, Glover KE, Major PW. An evaluation and comparison of orthodontic bracket bond strengths achieved with self-etching primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;126(2):213-9.

4. Urabe H, Rossouw PE, Titley KC, Yamin C. Combinations of etchants, composite resins, and bracket systems: an important choice in orthodontic bonding procedures. Angle Orthod. 1999;69(3):267-75.

5. Yadala C, Gaddam R, Arya S, Baburamreddy KV, Raju VR, Varma PK. Comparison of shear bond strength of three self-etching adhesives: an in-vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7(7):53.

6. Hoos JC. Clinical findings using a self-etching primer. Dent Today. 1999;18(9):102-3. 

7. Tuncer C, Ulusoy Ç. Tensile bond strength of lingual orthodontic brackets with adhesive systems. World J Orthod. 2010;11(4):393-7.

8. Canay Ş, Kocadereli I, Akça E. The effect of enamel air abrasion on the retention of bonded metallic orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117(1):15-9.

9. Justus R, Cubero T, Ondarza R, Morales F. A new technique with sodium hypochlorite to increase bracket shear bond strength of fluoride-releasing resin-modified glass ionomer cements: comparing shear bond strength of two adhesive systems with enamel surface eproteinization before etching. Semin Orthod. 2010;16(1): 66-75.

10. Halpern RM, Rouleau T. The effect of air abrasion preparation on the shear bond strength of an orthodontic bracket bonded to enamel. Eur J Orthod. 2009;32(2):224-7.

11. Rivera-Prado H, Moyaho-Bernal Á, Andrade- Torres A, Franco-Romero G, Montiel-Jarquín Á, Mendoza-Pinto C, et al. Efficiency in bracket bonding with the use of pretreatment methods to tooth enamel before acid etching: sodium hypochlorite vs. hydrogen peroxide echniques. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2015;28(1):79-82.

12. Robles-Ruíz JJ, Arana-Chavez VE, Ciamponi AL, Abrão J, Kanashiro LK. Effects of sandblasting before orthophosphoric acid etching on lingual enamel: In-vitro roughness assessment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(4):S76-81.

13. Bishara SE, Ajlouni R, Laffoon JF. Effect of thermocycling on the shear bond strength of a cyanoacrylate orthodontic adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;123(1):21-4.

14. Espinosa R, Valencia R, Uribe M, Ceja I, Saadia M. Enamel deproteinization and its effect on acid etching: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008;33(1):13-9.

15. Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod. 1975;2(3):171-8. 

16. Silverstone LM, Saxton CA, Dogon IL, Fejerskov O. Variation in the pattern of acid etching of human dental enamel examined by scanning electron microscopy. Caries Res. 1975;9(5):373-87.

17. Mehdi S, Mano MC, Sorel O, Cathelineau G, Air abrasion of enamel. Orthod Fr. 2009;80:179-92. 

18. Suma S, Anita G, Shekar BC, Kallury A. The effect of air abrasion on the retention of metallic brackets bonded to fluorosed enamel surface. Indian J Dent Res. 2012;23(2):230.

19. Brosh T, Strouthou S, Sarne O. Effects of buccal versus lingual surfaces, enamel conditioning procedures and storage duration on brackets debonding characteristics. J Dent. 2005;33(2):99- 105.

20. Brauchli L, Muscillo T, Steineck M, Wichelhaus A. Influence of enamel conditioning on the shear bond strength of different adhesives. J Orofac Orthop. 2010;71(6):411-20.

21. Türköz Ç, Ulusoy Ç. Evaluation of different enamel conditioning techniques for orthodontic bonding. Korean J Orthod. 2012;42(1):32-8.

22. Patcas R, Zinelis S, Eliades G, Eliades T. Surface and interfacial analysis of sandblasted and acid- etched enamel for bonding orthodontic adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(4):S64- 75.

23. Amm EW, Hardan LS, BouSerhal JP, Glasl B, Ludwig B. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with self-etching primer to intact and pre-conditioned human enamel. J Orofac Orthop. 2008;69(5):383-92.

24. Nandini S, Hemalatha S, Sanju KS. Air Abrasion as an Adjunct to Conventional Acid Etching in Orthodontic Bonding. J Dent Sci and Res. 2011;2(2):1-5.

25. Mati M, Amm E, Bouserhal J, Bassil-Nassif N.  Effects of buccal and lingual enamel sandblasting on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with a self-etching primer. Int Orthod. 2012;10(4):422-31.

26. Scougall-Vilchis RJ, Ohashi S, Yamamoto K. Effects of 6 self-etching primers on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135(4):424-e1-7.

27. Kaaden C, Powers JM, Friedl KH, Schmalz G. Bond strength of self-etching adhesives to dental hard tissues. Clin Oral Investig. 2002;6(3):155-60.

28. Vilchis RJ, Yamamoto S, Kitai N, Yamamoto K. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with different self-etching adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(3):425-30.

29. Mirzakouchaki B, Kimyai S, Hydari M, Shahrbaf S, Mirzakouchaki-Boroujeni P. Effect of self-etching primer/adhesive and conventional bonding on the shear bond strength in metallic and ceramic brackets. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(1):e164-170.

30. Sharma S, Tandon P, Nagar A, Singh GP, Singh A, Chugh VK. A comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with four different. orthodontic adhesives. J Orthod Sci. 2014;3(2):29.