Page 21 - SPEMD_58-2

rev port estomatol med dent cir maxilofac . 2017;58(2):71-78 77

different findings were noted in other studies involving G and Ethical disclosures
TP group 5,16,17,20,21 whereas different amounts of adhesive
were recorded on the enamel surface after bond strength
tests. Group ED achieved score 1 without effect of thermal Protection of human and animal subjects. The authors de-
cycling. On thermal fatigue, equal number of samples with clare that no experiments were performed on humans or an-
score 1 and 2 were achieved. No study using ED adhesive was imals for this study.
found in literature. ARI results showed a tendency, despite not Condentiality of data. The authors declare that no patient
statistically significant, to high shear bond strength being re- data appear in this article.
lated to higher amounts of adhesive remnants on the enamel
surface. This is in agreement with the findings of some others Right to privacy and informed consent. The authors declare
4,5
studies. Some previous studies concluded that the increase that no patient data appear in this article.
in bond strength of adhesives resulted in higher amount of
1,7
adhesive remnants on enamel surface while groups with Conflicts of interest
lower bonding strength showed more adhesive on bracket
7
base. The balance between bond strength of the adhesive to
enamel and enamel damage is the main key to obtain suc- The authors have no conficts of interest to declare.
cessful results in an orthodontic treatment regarding the pro-
cedure of bracket bonding. 21 Aknowledgments
Also, results revealed a tendency for thermal cycled spec-
imens to exhibit lower bond strength values together with
higher percentage of adhesive remnants on the enamel sur- Authors acknowledge Fundação para Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT)
face. This might be explained by the detrimental effect of the (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000018 HAMaBICo) for the fnancial
thermal cycling on the interface between adhesive and the support. Also, authors a thank you to Mr. Hélder Martins and to
bracket base. In fact, the microgaps existing at that interface Orthosmile ltda for providing the materials tested in this study.
allowed the penetration of the artificial saliva at these loca-
7
tions and to accelerate up the adhesives deterioration. references
Higher prevalence of cohesive fractures was thus expected
to occur. On the interface microstructure, the adhesive thick- 1. Su MZ, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen HJ, Chang FH, Chiang, YC, Lin
ness remained between 200 and 250 m according to SEM CP. Effect of simulated debracketing on enamel damage. J
Formos Med Assoc. 2012;11:560 -6.
evaluation. That is considered to provide the proper bonding 2. Ewoldsen N, Demke R S. A review of orthodontic cements and
results. 8,15 However, the thickness of the adhesive is not the adhesives. Amer J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2001;20:45 -8.
same considering variations related to the operator tech- 3. Chin MY, Sandham A, Rumachik EN, Ruben JL, Huysmans
nique, materials properties and geometry of the teeth sur- MC. Fluoride release and cariostatic potencial of orthodontic
faces. 8,15,21 It is noteworthy to highlight the lack of connec- adhesives with and without daily fuoride rinsing. Am J
tion between the bracket base and the adhesive, when Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136:547 -53.
compared to the good adhesive -enamel interface. The neg- 4. Haydar B, Sarikaya S, Cehreli ZC. Comparison of shear bond
strength of three bonding agents with metal and ceramic
ative effects of these microgaps, as discussed above, can be brackets. Angle Orthod. 1999;69:457 -62.
addressed by a surface treatment on the bracket base allow- 5. Ekhlassi S, English JD, Ontiveros JC, Powers JM, Bussa HI, Frey
ing the establishment of a satisfactory bond between the two GN, Colville CD, Ellis RK. Bond strength comparison of
materials. color -change adhesives for orthodontic bonding using a
self -etching primer. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2011;3:39 -44.
6. Ludwig B, Glasl B. Materials. In Ludwig B, Bister D,
Baumgaertel S. Self -ligating Brackets in Orthodontics:
Conclusions
Current Concepts and Techniques. Thieme, Stuttgart. 2012,
10 -33.
Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions 7. Baherimoghadam T, Akbarian S, Rasouli R, Naseri N.
can be drawn: Evaluation of enamel damages following orthodontic bracket
debonding in fuorosed teeth bonded with adhesion
A resin composite adhesive showed a high bond promoter. Eur J Dent. 2016;10:193 -8.
strength value at about 11 MPa that is proper for clinical 8. Arici S, Caniklioglu CM, Arici N, Ozer M, Oguz B. Adhesive
thickness effects on the bond strength of a light - cured
application. The compomer -based adhesive was the resin -modifed glass ionomer cement. Angle Orthod.
only adhesive significantly affected by the thermal cy- 2005;75:254 -9.
cling. 9. Gomes P, Portugal J, Jardim L. Effect of high -powered LED -curing
The orthodontic adhesives tested in this study revealed exposure time on orthodontic bracket shear bond strength. Rev
high adhesion strength that resulted in high amount of Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac. 2014;55:78 -82.
adhesive remnants on the enamel surface, after 10. Mendes M, Portugal J, Arantes -Oliveira S, Mesquita P. Shear
debonding. bond strength of orthodontic brackets to fuorosed enamel.
Rev Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac. 2014;55:73 -7.
The interface between the adhesive and the enamel 11. Alkis H, Turkkahraman H, Adanir N. Microleakage under
showed better integrity than that between the adhesive orthodontic brackets bonded with different adhesive
and the bracket. systems. Eur J Dent. 2015;9:117 -21.