Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bonded Orthodontic Retainers: A Comparison of Initial Bond Strength of Different Wire-and-Composite Combinations

Zur Stabilität geklebter kieferorthopädische Retainer: ein Vergleich der initialen Verbundfestigkeit verschiedener Draht-Komposit-Kombinationen

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives:

The aim of this in-vitro study was to evaluate initial bond strength in Newton (N) of two types of wires (Ortho- Flextech™ chain and Penta-One™ Coaxial wire 0.0215") bonded with three lingual retainer composites (FlowTain™, Light Cure Retainer™ and Transbond™ LR).

Materials and Methods:

One hundred and eighty sound, extracted human premolars were randomly divided into six equal groups. One of the two types of lingual retainer wires was bonded with one of the three types of the composite material in each group. Initial bond strength was measured using an Instron universal testing machine. We also evaluated the failure characteristics after failure at maximum load using an optical microscope.

Results:

Our findings demonstrated that the Coaxial/Transbond™ LR group was statistically significantly stronger than the other combinations. Statistically, 0.0215" Coaxial wire provided significantly stronger bond strength than Ortho-Flextech™ chain, and when the three composite systems were compared, Transbond ™ LR revealed significantly higher bond strength than the others. However, Transbond™ LR left significantly more resin on the enamel surface after bond failure.

Conclusion:

Significant differences exist between different combinations of wires and lingual retainer composites; however, all the wire-and-composite combinations we tested possess sufficient bond strength for clinical application.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel:

In einer In-vitro-Studie wurde die initiale Verbundfestigkeit [N] zweier Drahttypen (Ortho-Flextech™-Kette und Penta-One™- Coaxial-Draht 0.0215") in Verbindung mit drei für Lingualretainer gebräuchlichen Kompositen (FlowTain™, Light Cure Retainer™ and Transbond™ LR) getestet.

Material und Methodik:

Hundertachtzig extrahierte gesunde menschliche Prämolaren wurden nach dem Zufallsprinzip in sechs gleichgroße Gruppen aufgeteilt. In jeder Gruppe wurde einer der beiden Drahttypen mit einem der drei Kompositmaterialien geklebt. Die initiale Verbundfestigkeit wurde mittels einer Instron- Universalprüfmaschine untersucht. Zusätzlich wurden mit einem Lichtmikroskop die Bruchcharakteristika nach Abriss bei maximaler Kraft untersucht.

Ergebnisse:

Die Coaxial/Transbond™-LR-Verbindung war statistisch signifikant stabiler als die anderen Draht-Komposit-Kombinationen. Der Statistik nach erbrachte der 0.0215-Coaxial-Draht signifikant bessere Haftwerte als die Ortho-Flextech™-Kette, und im Vergleich der drei Kompositkleber war die Verbundfestigkeit des Transbond™-LR-Klebers signifikant am höchsten. Allerdings verblieb beim Transbond™ LR nach Bruch des Klebeverbundes auch der signifikant größte Anteil an Restkunststoff auf der Schmelzoberfläche.

Schlussfolgerung:

Zwischen den einzelnen Draht-Kompositkleber- Kombinationen bestehen signifikante Unterschiede; jedoch ergab sich bei allen getesteten Kombinationen eine für die klinische Anwendung ausreichende Verbundfestigkeit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Al-Sehaibany F, Al-Emran S, Al-Khatani F, et al. Bond strength of two techniques for bonding lingual orthodontic retainer. Saudi Dent J 2006;18:120–4.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Årtun J, Spadafora AT, Shapiro PA. A three-year follow up study of various types of orthodontic canine-to-canine retainers. Eur J Orthod 1997;19:501–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bearn DR, McCabe JF, Gordon PH, et al. Bonded orthodontic retainers: the wire-composite interface. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:67–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dahl EH, Zachrisson BU. Long-term experience with direct-bonded lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod 1991;25:619–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Diamond M. Resin fiberglass bonded retainer. J Clin Orthod 1987;21:182–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Little RM, Wallen TR, Riedel RA. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior alignment-first premolar extraction cases treated by traditional edgewise orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1981;80:349–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Little RM, Riedel RA, Årtun J. An evaluation of changes in mandibular anterior alignment from 10 to 20 years post retention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93:423–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Little RM, Riedel RA. Postretention evaluation of stability and relapse- mandibular arches with generalized spacing. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;95:37–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Little RM. Stability and relapse of dental arch alignment. Br J Orthod 1990;17:235–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Littlewood SJ, Millett DT, Doubleday B, et al. Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD002283. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002283.pub3.

  11. Lumsden KW, Saidler G, McColl JH. Breakage incidence with direct bonded lingual retainers. Br J Orthod 1999;26:191–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oesterle LJ, Shellhart WC, Henderson S. Enhancing wire-composite bond strength of bonded retainers with wire surface treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:625–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Orchin JD. Permanent lingual bonded retainer. J Clin Orthod 1990;24:229–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sinclair PM, Little RM. Maturation of untreated normal occlusions. Am J Orthod 1983;83:114–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Radlanski RJ, Zain ND. Stability of the bonded lingual wire retainer: a study of the initial bond strength. J Orofac Orthop 2004;65:321–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975;2:171–8.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rose E, Frucht S, Jonas IE. Clinical comparison of a multistranded wire and a direct-bonded polyethylene ribbon-reinforced resin composite used for lingual retention. Quintessence Int 2002;33:579–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Waters NE. Some mechanical and physical properties of teeth. Symp Soc Exp Biol 1980;34:99–135.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zachrisson BU. Clinical experience with direct-bonded orthodontic retainers. Am J Orthod 1977;71:440–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zachrisson BU. JCO/interviews Dr. Bj:orn U. Zachrisson on excellence in finishing. Part 2. J Clin Orthod 1986;20:536–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zachrisson BU. Third-generation mandibular bonded lingual 3-3 retainer. J Clin Orthod 1995;28:39–48.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Abdullah M. Aldrees BDS DMSc

  2. Riyadh Military Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Terki K. Al-Mutairi

  3. College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia

    Zaki W. Hakami

  4. Assir Dental Center, Ministry of Health, Khamis Mushait, Saudi Arabia

    Mohammad M. Al-Malki

  5. Assistant Professor, Chairman, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Abdullah M. Aldrees BDS DMSc

Authors
  1. Abdullah M. Aldrees BDS DMSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Terki K. Al-Mutairi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zaki W. Hakami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad M. Al-Malki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdullah M. Aldrees BDS DMSc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aldrees, A.M., Al-Mutairi, T.K., Hakami, Z.W. et al. Bonded Orthodontic Retainers: A Comparison of Initial Bond Strength of Different Wire-and-Composite Combinations. J Orofac Orthop 71, 290–299 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-010-9947-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-010-9947-5

Key Words:

Schlüsselwörter:

Search

Navigation