Comparison of bracket debonding force between two conventional resin adhesives and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: An in vitro and in vivo study

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 69, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 463-469

  Shammaa, Imad ^b   Ngan, Peter ^a,b   Kim, Hera ^b   Kao, Elizabeth ^b   Gladwin, Marcia ^b   Gunel, Erdogan ^a   Brown, Christopher ^c  

^a WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b West Virginia University School of Dentistry   (United States)

^c West Virginia University   (United States)

Author keywords

Bond strength; Composite resins; Glass ionomer cement

Indexed keywords

ACRYLIC ACID RESIN; ADHESIVE AGENT; ALUMINUM SILICATE; FUJI ORTHO LC; GLASS IONOMER; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT;

ADOLESCENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL DEBONDING; ENAMEL; EQUIPMENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICAL STRESS; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SURFACE PROPERTY; SURVIVAL; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ACRYLIC RESINS; ADHESIVES; ADOLESCENT; ALUMINUM SILICATES; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL DEBONDING; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MATERIALS TESTING; ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS; RESIN CEMENTS; SEX FACTORS; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0033208820     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Newman GV. Epoxy adhesives for orthodontic attachments: Progress report. Am J Orthod 1965;51:901-912.
2. Brown CRL, Way DC. Enamel loss during orthodontic bonding and subsequent loss during removal of filled and unfilled adhesives. Am J Orthod 1978;74:663-671.
3. Rouleau BD, Marshall GW, Cooly RO. Enamel surface evaluations after clinical treatment and removal of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod 1982;81:423-426.
4. Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. Br Dent J 1972; 132:133-135.
5. Wilson AD, Crisp S, Lewis BG, McLean JW. Experimental luting agents based on the glass ionomer cements. Br Dent J 1977;142:117-122.
6. Powers JM, Kirn HB, Turner DS. Orthodontic adhesives and bond strength testing. Semin Orthod 1997;3:147-156.
7. Jobalia SB, Valente RM, DeRijk WG, BeGole EA, Evans CA. Bond strength of visible light-cured glass ionomer orthodontic cement. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;112:205-208.
8. Komori A, Ishikawa H. Evaluation of a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement for use as an orthodontic bonding agent. Angle Orthod 1997;67:189-196.
9. Silverman E, Cowen M, Demke RS, Silverman M. A new light-cured glass ionomer cement that bonds brackets to teeth without etching in the presence of saliva. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;108:231-236.
10. Millett DT, McCabe JF. Orthodontic bonding with glass ionomer cement - a review. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:385-399.
11. Delport A, Grobler SR. A laboratory evaluation of the tensile bond strength of some orthodontic bonding resins to enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1988;93:133-137.
12. Jassem HA, Relief DH, Jamison HC Tensile and shear strengths of bonded and rebonded orthodontic attachments. Am J Orthod 1981;79:661-668.
13. White LW. Glass ionomer cement. J Clin Orthod 1986;20:387-391.
14. Årtun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85:333-340.
15. Kinch AP, Taylor H, Warltier R, Oliver RG, Newcombe RG. A clinical trial comparing the failure rates of directly bonded brackets using etch times of 15 or 60 seconds. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1988;94:476-483.
16. Bradburn G, Pender N. An in vitro study of the bond strength of two light-cured composites used in the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets to molars. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 102:418-426.
17. Messersmith ML, Devine SM, Zionic AE. Effects of tooth surface preparation on the shear bond strength of resin modified glass ionomer cements. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:503-509.
18. Cohen S, Marulli R, Binder RE, Vaidyanathan TK. Shear bond strengths of chemically and light-cured resinmodified ionomers. J Clin Orthod 1998; 32:423-426.
19. Chung CH, Cuozzo, Mante FK. Shear bond strength of a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: An in vitro comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;115:52-54.
20. Tavas MA, Watts DC. A visible light activated direct bonding material: An in vitro study. Br J Orthod 1984;11:33-37.
21. Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975;2:171-78.
22. McSherry PF. An in vitro evaluation of the tensile and shear strengths of four adhesives used in orthodontics. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:319-327.
23. Fowis DR, Folleras T, Merson SA, Wilson AD. Improved adhesion of a glass ionomer cement to dentin and enamel. J Dent Res 1982;61:1416-1422.
24. Fricker JP. A12 month clinical evaluation of a light-activated glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement for the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:502-505.
25. Norevall LI, Marcusson A, Persson M. A clinical evaluation of a glass ionomer cement as an orthodontic bonding adhesive compared with an acrylic resin. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:373-384.
26. Wiltshire WA, Janse van Rensburg SD. Fluoride release from four visible light-cured orthodontics adhesive resins. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;108:278-283.
27. Mizrahi E. Success and failure of banding and bonding: a clinical study. Angle Orthod 1982;52:113-117.
28. Trimpeneers LM, Dermaut LR. A clinical trial comparing the failure rates of two orthodontic bonding systems. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996;110:547-550.
29. Zachrisson BU. A post treatment evaluation of direct bonding in orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1977;71:173-189
30. Oen JO, Gjerdet NR, Wisth PJ. Glass ionomer cements used as bonding materials for metal orthodontic brackets: An in vitro study. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:187-191.