Comparison of bond strength between simple foil mesh and laser-structured base retention brackets

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 122, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 260-266

  Sorel, Olivier ^a   El Alam, Rafeh ^a   Chagneau, Francis ^a   Cathelineau, Guy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE RENNES 1   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

METAL; RESIN; SODIUM CHLORIDE; DENTAL ALLOY; RESIN CEMENT;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL BOND; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENAMEL; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMERSION; INSTRUMENTATION; LASER; MACHINE; MECHANICS; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; PREMOLAR TOOTH; SAFETY; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURFACE PROPERTY; TENSILE STRENGTH; TOOTH EXTRACTION; X RAY SPECTROMETRY; ADHESION; CHEMISTRY; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARE; ELECTRON PROBE MICROANALYSIS; EQUIPMENT; MECHANICAL STRESS; ORTHODONTICS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; TEMPERATURE; TIME; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ADHESIVENESS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DENTAL ALLOYS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; ELECTRON PROBE MICROANALYSIS; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; HUMANS; LASERS; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE DESIGN; ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS; RESIN CEMENTS; SODIUM CHLORIDE; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURGICAL MESH; TEMPERATURE; TENSILE STRENGTH; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0036717912     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.125834     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Newman GV. Epoxy for orthodontic attachments. Am J Orthod 1965;51:901-12.
2. Silverman E, Cohen M, Gianelly A, Dietz V. A universal direct system for both metal and plastic brackets. Am J Orthod 1972;62:236-44.
3. Hocevar RA. Direct bonding update. J Clin Orthod 1979;13:172-5.
4. Gottlieb EL, Nelson AH, Vogels DS. 1986 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures. J Clin Orthod 1986;20:694-709.
5. El Alam R, Sorel O, Cathelineau G. Comparison morphologique de l'intrados des bases de différentes attaches orthodontiques métalliques observées au microscope électronique à balayage. Orthod Fr 1997;68:355.
6. Bishara SE, Fehr DE, Jakobsen JR. A comparative study of the debonding strengths of different ceramic brackets, enamel conditioners and adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;104:170-9.
7. Osorio R, Toledano M, Garcia-Godoy F. Enamel surface morphology after bracket debonding. ASDC J Dent Child 1998;65:313-7,354.
8. Ødegaard J, Segener D. Shear bond strength of metal brackets compared with a new ceramic bracket. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:201-6.
9. MacColl GA, Rossouw PE, Titley KC, Yamin C. The relationship between bond strength and orthodontic bracket base surface area with conventional and microetched foil-mesh bases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:276-81.
10. Wang WN, Meng CL, Tarng TH. Bond strength: a comparison between chemical coated and mechanical interlock bases of ceramic and metal brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;11:374-81.
11. Bishara SE, Olsen M, VonWald I. Comparisons of shear bond strength of precoated and uncoated brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:617-21.
12. Forestier JP, Picard B, Tavernier B. Caractérisation de l'interface atatche orthodontique/matériau de collage: approche mécanique. Orthod Fr 1996;67:427-34.
13. Millett D, McCabe JF, Gordon PH. The role of sandblasting on the retention of metallic brackets applied with glass ionomer cement. Br J Orthod 1993;20:117-22.
14. Regan D, LeMasney B, Van-Noort R. The tensile bond strength of new and rebonded stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:125-35.
15. Merrill SW, Oesterle LJ, Hermersch CB. Ceramic bracket bonding: a comparison of shear, tensile and torsional bond strengths of ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;106:290-7.
16. Ireland AJ, Sherriff M. Use of an adhesive resin for bonding orthodontic brackets. Eur J Orthod 1994;16:27-34.
17. Sernetz F, Binder F. Improvement of bond strength of orthodontic titanium brackets and tubes by laser structuring. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Joining Ceramics, Glass and Metal; 1997 May 12-14; Jena, Germany. DVS Berichte Band 184, 1997, 82-85.
18. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955;34:849-53.
19. Silverstone LM. The acid etch technique: in vitro studies with special reference to the enamel surface and the enamel-resin interface. In: Silverstone LM, Dogan L, editors. Proceedings of an international symposium on the acid etch technique. St Paul (Minn): North Central Publishing Company; 1975. p. 13-39.
20. Wang WN, Yeh CL, Fang BD, Sun KT, Arvystas MG. Effect of H3PO4 concentration on bond strength. Angle Orthod 1994;64:377-82.
21. Carstensen W. Effect of reduction of phosphoric acid concentration on the shear bond strength of brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:274-7.
22. Bin Abdullah M, Rock WP. The effect of etch time and debond interval upon the shear bond strength of metallic orthodontic bracket. Br J Orthod 1996;23:121-4.
23. Osorio R, Toledano M, Garcia-Godoy F. Bracket bonding with 15- or 60-second etching and adhesive remaining on enamel after debonding. Angle Orthod 1999;69:45-8.
24. Oliver RG. The effect of different methods of bracket removal on the amount of residual adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93:196-200.
25. Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975;2:171-8.
26. VanWaes H, Matter T, Krejci I. Three-dimensional measurement of enamel loss caused by bonding and debonding of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:666-9.
27. Fischer-Brandies H, Monsees M. Enamel damage from multiple debonding in the bracket adhesion technic. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1993;54:143-7.
28. Ruppenthal T, Stratmann U, Sergl HG, Czech D. Elemental analytical and quantitative morphometric determination of the synthetic resin residues and enamel avulsion after the removal of metal bracket. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1992;53:99-105.
29. Sinha PK, Nanda RS. The effect of different bonding and debonding techniques on debonding ceramic orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:132-7.
30. Stratmann U, Schaarschmidt K, Wegener H, Ehmer U. The extent of enamel surface fractures: a quantitative comparison of thermally debonded ceramic and mechanically debonded metal brackets by energy dispersive micro- and image-analysis. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:655-62.
31. Retief DH. Failure at the dental adhesive-etched enamel interface. J Oral Rehabil 1974;1:265-84.