Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets to Composite Restorations Using Universal Adhesive

Tahmasbi, Soodeh; Badiee, Mohammadreza; Modarresi, Maryam

doi:10.30476/dentjods.2019.44927

Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets to Composite Restorations Using Universal Adhesive

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Soodeh Tahmasbi ¹

Mohammadreza Badiee ²

Maryam Modarresi ³

¹ Dept. of Orthodontics, Dentofacial Deformities Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

² Dentofacial Deformities Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

³ Dental Student, Dental Research Committee, Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2019.44927

Abstract

Statement of the Problem: The dental adhesives may have the potential to increase the bond strength of orthodontic brackets to composite resin and it would be highly desirable if adequate bracket-composite bond strength could be yielded by using these adhesives without the need for surface roughening.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure the shear bond strength (SBS) of metal brackets to composite restorations by use of a universal adhesive compared with a conventional adhesive.Materials and Method: In this in vitro, experimental study, 45 composite discs measuring 6 mm in diameter and 4 mm in thickness were fabricated and assigned to three groups (n=15). In the group 1, discs were etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds and Scotchbond Universal was then applied. Discs were roughened by diamond bur in the group 2 and were subjected to the application of Scotchbond Universal. In the group 3, conventional adhesive (Single Bond 2) was applied after roughening the discs by diamond bur. Metal brackets were then bonded to discs and after thermocycling, the SBS was measured by an Instron machine. The mode of failure and adhesive remnant index (ARI) score were determined using stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed by SPSS version 18, one-way ANOVA, and the Kruskal Wallis test.Results: The surface roughening plus universal adhesive group showed the highest SBS (11.90 MPa) but according to one-way ANOVA, the difference in this regard among the three groups was not statistically significant (p= 0.94). Most samples showed ARI score of 4.Conclusion: Universal adhesive can provide sufficient bond strength as high as that provided by conventional adhesives for orthodontic bracket bonding to composite restorations even in absence of surface roughening by bur.Key Words ● Adhesives ● Composite Resins ● Dental Bonding ● Orthodontic Brackets

Keywords

Adhesives

Composite Resins

Dental Bonding

Orthodontic Brackets

1. Eslamian L, Ghassemi A, Amini F, Jafari A, Afrand M. Should silane coupling agents be used when bonding brackets to compositerestorations? An in vitro study. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31: 266–270. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Tse M. Effect of Surface Treatments and Bonding Agents on the Shear Bond Strengths of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded to Aged Composite Resin Restorations. 1th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2012. pp. 339–347. [Google Scholar]

3. Eslamian L, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Mousavi N, Ghasemi A. The effects of various surface treatments on the shear bond strengths of stainlesssteel brackets to artificially-aged composite restorations. Aust Orthod J. 2011; 27: 28–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Lai PY, Woods MG, Tyas MJ. Bond strengths of orthodontic brackets to restorative resin composite surfaces. Aust Orthod J. 1999; 15: 235–245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Marchesi G, Frassetto A, Mazzoni A, Apolonio F, Diolosà M, Cadenaro M, et al. Adhesive performance of a multi-mode adhesive system: 1-year in vitro study. J Dent. 2014; 42: 603–612. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamelpretreatment. Am J Orthod. 1984; 85: 333–340. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Viwattanatipa N, Prasertsangwal J, Juntavee N. Weibull analysis of shear/ peel bond strength of orthodontic buccal tubes bonded to five resin composites. Ortho Waves. 2008; 67:120–127. [Google Scholar]

8. Crumpler DC, Bayne SC, Sockwell S, Brunson D, Roberson TM. Bonding to resurfaced posterior composites. Dent Mater. 1989; 5: 417–424. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Eslamian L, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Mousavi N, Ghasemi A. A comparative study of shear bond strength between metal and ceramic brackets and artificially aged composite restorations using different surface treatments. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34: 610–617. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Staxrud F, Dahl JE. Role of bonding agents in the repair of composite resin restorations. Eur J Oral Sci. 2011; 119: 316–322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Costa TR, Ferreira SQ, Klein-Júnior CA, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Durability of surface treatments and intermediate agents used for repair of a polishedcomposite. Oper Dent. 2010; 35: 231–237. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Viwattanatipa N, Jermwiwatkul W, Chintavalakorn R, Kanchanavasita W. Weibull analysis of bond strength of orthodontic buccal tubes bonded to resin composite surface with various techniques. Orthodontic Waves. 2010; 69:66–74. [Google Scholar]

13. Schwartz RE, Tyas MJ, West VC. Current note No. 71. The bonding of orthodontic brackets to composite resin surfaces Aust Dent J 1990; 35: 472–473. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Bayram M, Yesilyurt C, Kusgöz A, Ulker M, Nur M. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to aged resin composite surfaces: effect of surface conditioning. Eur J Orthod. 2011; 33: 174–179. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Bishara SE, Ajlouni R, Oonsombat C. Bonding orthodontic brackets to composite using different surface preparations and adhesive/primers: a comparative study. World J Orthod. 2003;4:343–347. [Google Scholar]

16. Viwattanatipa N, Jermwiwatkul W, Chintavalakorn R, Nanthavanich N. The effect of different surface preparation techniques on the survival probabilities of orthodontic brackets bonded to nanofill composite resin. J Orthod. 2010; 37: 162–173. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Ribeiro AA, de Morais AV, Brunetto DP, Ruellas AC, de Araujo MT. Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontics brackets on composite resinrestorations with different surface treatments. Dental Press J Orthod. 2013; 18: 98–103. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Brosh T, Pilo R, Bichacho N, Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bondstrength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77: 122–126. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Lung CY, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: an overview. Dent Mater. 2012; 28: 467–477. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Mair L, Padipatvuthikul P. Variables related to materials and preparing for bond strength testing irrespective of the test protocol. Dent Mater. 2010; 26: e17–e23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Mair LH. Surface permeability and degradation of dental composites resulting from oraltemperature changes. Dent Mater. 1989; 5: 247–255. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Buonocore MG. Retrospections on bonding. Dent Clin North Am. 1981; 25: 241–255. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Fox NA, McCabe JF, Buckley JG. A critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1994; 21: 33–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Tezvergil A, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers. J Dent. 2003; 31: 521–525. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Kitasako Y, Burrow MF, Nikaido T, Harada N, Inokoshi S, Yamada T, et al. Shear and tensile bond testing for resin cement evaluation. Dent Mater. 1995; 11: 298–304. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Summitt JB, Robbins JW, Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: a contemporary approach. 3rd ed. London: Quintessence Publishing Co; 2006. pp. 202–242. [Google Scholar]

27. Papacchini F, Magni E, Radovic I, Mazzitelli C, Monticellia F, Goracci C, et al. Effect of intermediate agents and pre-heating of repairing resin on composite-repairbonds. Oper Dent. 2007; 32: 363–371. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Isolan CP, Valente LL, Münchow EA, Basso GR, Pimentel AH, Schwantz JK, et al. Bond strength of a universal bonding agent and other contemporary dental adhesives applied on enamel, dentin, composite, and porcelain. Applied Adhesion Science. 2014; 2: 25. [Google Scholar]

29. Hellak A, Ebeling J, Schauseil M, Stein S, Roggendorf M, Korbmacher-Steiner H. Shear Bond Strength of Three Orthodontic Bonding Systems on Enamel and Restorative Materials. Biomed Res Int. 2016; 2016:6307107. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Tse M. The Effect of Surface Treatments and Bonding Agents on the Shear Bond Strengths of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded to Aged Composite Resin Restorations. Available at:[http://www.academia.edu/4271501/ ]

31. Reynolds IR. Letter: composite filling materials as adhesives in orthodontics. British Dental Journal. 1975; 138: 83. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

32. Van Landuyt, KL Snauwaert, J De, Munck J, Peumans M, Yoshida Y, Poitevin A. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials. 2007; 28: 3757–3785. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Graber LW, Vanarsdal RL, Vig KWL, Huang GJ. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 6th ed. Elsevier Inc: St Louis; 2017. p. 833. [Google Scholar]