The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

In vitro Evaluation of Microleakage under Ceramic and Metal Brackets Bonded with LED and Plasma Arc Curing

Abdolrahim Davari, Soghra Yassaei, Mariam Karandish, Fateme Zarghami

Citation Information : Davari A, Yassaei S, Karandish M, Zarghami F. In vitro Evaluation of Microleakage under Ceramic and Metal Brackets Bonded with LED and Plasma Arc Curing. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012; 13 (5):644-649.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1202

Published Online: 01-10-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The aim of the present study was to evaluate these two high intensity light curing units regarding microleakage beneath metal and ceramic brackets.

Materials and methods

A total of 60 freshly extracted human premolar teeth were randomly divided into four groups of 15 samples; group I: Metal bracket + LED cured, group II: Ceramic bracket + LED cured, group III: Metal bracket + plasma arc cured, group IV: Ceramic bracket + plasma arc cured.

After photopolymerization, the teeth were immersed in water and thermocycled (500 cycles between 5 and 55). Specimens were further sealed with nail varnish and stained with 5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours. All of the teeth were sectioned with two parallel longitudinal occlusogingival cuts and examined under a stereomicroscope. The microleakage was measured with a digital caliper and scored from 0 to 3 for marginal microleakage at the bracket-adhesive and adhesive-enamel interfaces from both the occlusal and gingival margins.

Results

Microleakage was detected in all groups. The plasma arc cured group showed less microleakage than light emitting diode (LED) cured in all samples at the enamel-adhesive interface at the gingival margin (ceramic brackets, p = 0.009 and metal brackets, p = 0.005). The plasma arc cured samples showed less microleakage than LED cured in metal brackets at the adhesive-brackets interface at the occlusal margin (p = 0.033). While curing with an LED unit, ceramic brackets displayed significantly less microleakage than metal ones at the gingival margin of adhesive-enamel interface (p = 0.013).

The gingival margin in all groups exhibited higher microleakage compared with those observed in occlusal sides in all sample groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

1. LED units cause more microleakage than plasma arc units.

2. In all groups the microleakage at the gingival margin is greater than the occlusal margin.

Clinical significance

The microleakage formation permits the passage of bacteria and oral fluids initiating white spot lesions beneath the bracket base.

How to cite this article

Davari A, Yassaei S, Karandish M, Zarghami F. In vitro Evaluation of Microleakage under Ceramic and Metal Brackets Bonded with LED and Plasma Arc Curing. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(5):644-649.


PDF Share
  1. Polymerization efficiency of chemically cured and visible lightcared orthodontic adhesives: Degree of cure. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:294-301.
  2. Effect of light modes and filling techniques on microleakage of posterior resin composite restoration. Oper Dent 2002;27(6):557-62.
  3. Comparison between a plasma arc light source and conventional halogen curing photoactivated resin composites. Clin Oral Invest 2000;4:140-47.
  4. Dental composite depth of cure with halogen and blue light emitting diode technology. Br Dent J 1999;186:388-91.
  5. Effect of light source intensity on shear bond strength. Abstract presented at the joint mitting of continental. European division (CED), scandinavian division (NOF) and Israili divisian (ID) of the international association for dental research (IADR), Aug 25-28, 2004 Istanbul, Turkey.
  6. Curing efficiency of different polymerization methods, through ceramic restoration. Clin Oral Invest 2001;5-156-61.
  7. Microleakage beneath ceramic and metal brackets photopolymerized with LED or conventional light curing units. Angle Orthod 2006;16(6):1035-40.
  8. Microleakage beneath ceramic and metal brackets bonded with a conventional and an antibacterial adhesive system. Angle Orthod 2006;76(6):1028-33.
  9. Microleakage under metallic and ceramic brackets bonded with orthodontic selfetching primer systems. Angle orthod 2008;18(6):1089-94.
  10. Microleakage under orthodontic brackets using high-intensity curing lights. Angle Orthod 2009;79:144-49.
  11. Curing efficiency of different polymerization methods, through ceramic restoration. Clin Oral Invest 2001;5:156-61.
  12. Effect of high speed caring devices shear bond strength and microleakage of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod 2003;123:555-61.
  13. Influence of different light sources on microleakage of class V composit resin restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31(5):500-04.
  14. Physical properties and gap formation of light cured composits with and without soft start polymerization. J Dent 1997;25(3-4):321-30.
  15. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets cured with different light sources under thermocycling. Eur J Dent 2010;4(3):257-62.
  16. Thermocycling effects on shear bond strength of a self-etching primer. Angle Orthodontist 2008;75(2):351-60.
  17. Effect of artificial aging regimens on the performance of self-etching adhesives. J Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater 2010;93(1):175-84.
  18. Thermal and mechanical load cycling on micro leakage and shear bond strength to dentin. Oper Dent 2004;29:42-48.
  19. Microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with the custom base indirect bonding technique. Eur J Ortho 2009;117-23.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.