The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

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

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Hydrophilic Bonding Materials: An in vitro Study

C Nirupama, Sarasa Kavitha, Josy Jacob, K Balaji, B Srinivasan, Ramakrishnan Murugesan, NR Krishnaswamy

Citation Information : Nirupama C, Kavitha S, Jacob J, Balaji K, Srinivasan B, Murugesan R, Krishnaswamy N. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Hydrophilic Bonding Materials: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012; 13 (5):637-643.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1201

Published Online: 01-02-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength of hydrophilic materials like Transbond MIP with Assure-fluoride releasing light cure sealant paste system (Reliance orthodontic product), Enhance Lc-adhesion booster (Reliance Orthodontics) Prime and Bond NT–one step adhesive with nanotechnology (Dentsply Product India) with Transbond XT as the control group.

Materials and methods

The study was conducted on 180 extracted human premolar teeth which were divided into five main groups. Each group contained 36 teeth, which were further subdivided into three subgroups containing 12 teeth. The teeth were bonded in three different surface environments namely dry, contaminated with artificial saliva and reprimed after contamination with artificial salvia. The brackets were bonded and cured. The shear bond strength was tested using Instron universal testing machine (4501).

Results

The results were subjected to statistical analysis like 3 factorial ANOVA and compared to post-hoc using the Student Newman levels test. The residual resin on the tooth surface after debonding was evaluated with adhesive remnant index.

Clinical significance

The results revealed that in situations in which moisture contamination is critical there is distinct advantage in using hydrophilic primers.

How to cite this article

Nirupama C, Kavitha S, Jacob J, Balaji K, Srinivasan B, Murugesan R, Krishnaswamy NR. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Hydrophilic Bonding Materials: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(5): 637-643.

PDF Share
  1. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955;34:849-53.
  2. Comparison of bond strength of three adhesives: Composite resin, hybrid GIC and glass-filled GIC. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:36-42.
  3. Rebonding brackets. J Clin Orthod 1980 Dec;850-54.
  4. Enhance LC, Reliance Orthodontics Produit literature.
  5. Clinical dials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1984;85(4):333-40.
  6. Moist versus dry dentin: Its effect on shear bond strength. Am J Dent 1992;5:127-29.
  7. Bond strength to etched enamel and dentin contaminated with saliva. Am J Dent 1994 Dec;7(6).
  8. The effect of saliva on shear bond strengths of hydrophilic bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:54-58.
  9. Shear bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets with a moisture-insensitive primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:251-55.
  10. The effect of moisture and blood contamination in bond strength of a new orthodontic bonding material. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:54-57.
  11. Effects of saliva and water contamination on the v enamel shear bond strength of a light-cured glass ionomer cement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:402-07.
  12. The effect of etchant concentration and the duration on the retention of brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:417-21.
  13. Enamel loss due to orthodontic bonding with filled and unfilled resinus using various clean-up techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1980;77(3):269-83.
  14. Crystal growth on the outer enamel surface–an alternative to acid etching. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1986;89(3):183-93.
  15. Direct bonding comparing a polyacrylic acid and a phosphoric acid technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthopl 1986;90:187-94.
  16. Effectiveness of nitric acid-NPG as a conditioning agent for enamel. Am J Dent 1990;4:265-67.
  17. Shear peel bond strength of esthetic orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102:215-19.
  18. Super pulse CO2 laser for bracket bonding and debonding. Europ J Orthod 1999;2:193-98.
  19. Update on bonding brackets: An in vitro survey. J Clin Orthod 1994;38:396-402.
  20. A clinical trial comparing the failure rates of directly bonded brackets using etch times of 15 or 60 seconds. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:476-83.
  21. Effects of enamel etching time on bond strength and morphylogy. J Clin Orthod 1985;19:36-38.
  22. Tensile bond strengths of orthodontic bonding resins attachments to etched enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987;92:225-31.
  23. Effect of phosphoric acid concentration and etch duration on the bond strength of an orthodontic bonding resin to enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98(5):154-60.
  24. Bonding of polymers to enamel: Influence of deposits formed during etching, etching time and period of water immersion. J Dent Res 1980;59:1156-62.
  25. The science of bonding: From 1st to 6th generation. J An Dent Assoc 2001 Jun;131.
  26. An ex vivo investigation into the bond strength of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems. Br J Orthod 1999 Mar;25(1):47-58.
  27. A critique of bond strength testing in orthodontics. Br J Orthodon 1994;21:33-43.
  28. The effect of different methods of bracket removal on the amount of residual adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;Mar:196-200.
  29. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975;85:333-40.
  30. Use of a bonding agent to reduce sealant sensitivity to moisture contamination: An in vitro study. Pediatr Dent 1992;14:41-46.
  31. A new light-cured glass ionomer cement that bonds brackets to teeth without etching in the presence of saliva. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:231-36.
  32. Bond strength of younger and older permanent teeth with various etching times. Angle 1993;3:225-30.
  33. Effect of water contamination on the shear bond strength of five orthodontic adhesives. Med Oral Patol Oral Cit Bucal 2010 Sept;15(5):e 820-26.
  34. A comparison of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics of conventional, moisture insensitive and self-etching primer. In vitro Angle Orthod 2004.
  35. Blood contamination effect on shear bond strength of an orthodontic hydrophilic resin. J Appl Oral Science, 2012 Feb 20(1):89-93.
  36. Effects of moisture conditions of dental enamel surface on bond strength of brackets bonded with moisture-insensitive primer adhesive system. Odontology 2008;96(1):50-54.
  37. Shear bond strength of brackets bonded with hydrophilic and hydrophobic bond systems under contamination 2010;80(5).
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.