Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of adhesives and the base structure of metal brackets on shear bond strength

Der Einfluss des Adhäsivs und der Basisstruktur von Metallbrackets auf die Scherhaftfestigkeit

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

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate the shear bond strength of compound made of tooth enamel, adhesive, and brackets for certain material combinations according to the DIN 13990-2 standard.

Materials and methods

We examined a combination of the following materials on permanent bovine incisors: (1) adhesives: Light Bond™ and Phase II® (both produced by Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, IL, USA), Transbond XT™ (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA), (2) brackets: Carriere®, Euro Midi Classic, Midi Low Friction (all from Ortho Organizers, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The discovery® bracket (Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany) served as the reference. According to the DIN standard, the teeth were embedded, adhesive was applied and they were then put into storage. This was followed by shear tests in a material testing machine with the shear force acting directly on the bracket base in the occlusal-gingival direction. Finally, the Adhesive Remnant Index was determined.

Results

We observed the greatest shear bond strength (mean value) from the combination of Carriere® and Transbond XT™ (17.4 N/mm2), and the lowest from the combination of Euro Midi Classic and Phase II® (12.8 N/mm2). There were significant differences in the various material combinations. The values obtained from the measurements of discovery® together with Transbond XT™ agreed very well with the results of previous investigations.

Conclusion

The combinations of brackets and adhesives investigated in this study according to DIN standard 13990-2 provided a satisfactory result for clinical use.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel

Ziel der vorliegenden Untersuchung war es, auf der Basis der DIN-Norm 13990-2 die Scherhaftfestigkeit des Verbundes aus Zahnschmelz, Adhäsiv und Brackets für ausgewählte Materialkombinationen zu untersuchen.

Material und Methodik

Eine Kombination aus folgenden Materialien wurde auf permanenten Rinderschneidezähnen untersucht: 1. Adhäsive: Light Bond™ und Phase II® (beide Reliance Orthodontic, Itasca, IL, USA), Transbond XT™ (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA), 2. Brackets: Carriere®, Euro Midi Classic, Midi Low Friction (alle Ortho Organizers, Carlsbad, CA, USA). Als Referenz diente das Bracket discovery® (Dentaurum, Ispringen, Deutschland). Die Zähne wurden nach DIN-Vorschrift eingebettet, beklebt und gelagert. Dann folgte der Abscherversuch in einer Werkstoffprüfmaschine mit einer von okklusal nach gingival wirkenden Scherkraft direkt an der Bracketbasis. Abschließend wurde der Adhesive-Remnant-Index bestimmt.

Ergebnisse

Die größte Scherhaftfestigkeit (Mittelwerte) ergab die Kombination aus Carriere® und Transbond XT™ (17,4 N/mm2), die geringste die Kombination Euro Midi Classic mit Phase II® (12,8 N/mm2). Insgesamt ergaben sich deutliche Unterschiede in den verschiedenen Materialkombinationen. Die Werte aus den Messungen an discovery® in Verbindung mit Transbond XT™ stimmten sehr gut mit den Ergebnissen vorhergehender Untersuchungen überein.

Schlussfolgerung

Die in dieser Studie gemäß DIN 13990-2 getesteten Kombinationen von Bracket und Adhäsiven ergaben für den klinischen Einsatz ein zufriedenstellendes Ergebnis.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Amm EW, Hardan LS, BouSerhal JP et al (2008) Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with self-etching primer to intact and preconditioned human enamel. J Orofac Orthop 69:383–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Årtun J, Bergland S (1984) Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pre-treatment. Am J Orthod 85:330–340

    Google Scholar 

  3. Benett CG, Shen C, Waldron JH (1984) The effects of debonding on the enamel surface. J Clin Orthod 18:330–334

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bishara SE, Gordan VV, VonWald L et al (1999) Shear bond strength of composite, glass ionomer, and acidic primer adhesive systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 115:24–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bishara SE, VonWald L, Laffon JF et al (2001) Effect of a self-etch primer/adhesive on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 119:621–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bishara SE, Ajlouni R, Soliman MM et al (2007) Evaluation of a new nano-filled restorative material for bonding orthodontic brackets. World J Orthod 8:8–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cal-Neto JP, Miguel JA (2004) Uma analisa dos testes in vitro de forca de adesao em Ortodontia. Rev Dent Press Ortodon Ortop Facial 9:44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Carli J (2011) Einfluss des Lagerungsmedium auf die Scherfestigkeitswerte mittels “Etch & Rinse”-Technik an humanen und bovinen Schmelz und Dentinflächen applizierter Komposite. Diss, Medizinische Fakultät Universität Hamburg, pp 19–22

  9. Diedrich P (1981) Enamel alterations from bracket bonding and debonding: a study with the scanning electron microscope. Am J Orthod 79:500–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Diedrich P (2000) Praxis der Zahnheilkunde. Urban&Fischer, München

  11. DIN 13990-2. Zahnheilkunde-Prüfverfahren für die Scherhaftfestigkeit von Adhäsiven für kieferorthopädische Befestigungselemente. Gesamtverbund Befestigungselement-Adhäsiv-Zahnschmelz. Beuth, Berlin, 2009

  12. Eberhard H, Hirschfelder U, Nkenke E et al (1994) In-vitro Untersuchung über die Haftfestigkeit und den Bruchverlauf von lichthärtenden, Fluorid abgebenden Befestigungsmaterialien bei Metallbrackets. Fortschr Kieferorthop 55:304–310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eliades T, Bourauel C (2005) Intraoral aging of orthodontic materials: the picture we miss and its clinical relevance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 127:403–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fox NA, McCabe JF, Buckley JG (1994) A critique of bond strength testing in Orthodontics. Br J Orthod 21:33–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fritz U, Diedrich P, Finger WJ (2001) Self-etching primers – an alternative to the conventional acid etch technique? J Orofac Orthop 62:238–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Graf I, Jacobi BE (2000) Bond strength of various fluoride – releasing orthodontic bonding systems. J Orofac Orthop 61:191–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gwinnett AJ, Gorelick L (1977) Microscopic evaluation of enamel after debonding. Am J Orthod 71:651–665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Iljima M, Ito S, Yuasa T et al (2008) Bond strength comparison and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of three orthodontic bonding systems. Dent Mater J 27:392–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. International Organisation for Standardization Office (2001) ISO/TS 11405. Dental materials – testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Geneva, Switzerland

  20. Knoll M, Gwinnett AJ, Wolff MS (1986) Shear strength of brackets bonded to anterior and posterior teeth. Am J Orthod 89:476–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. O’Brien KD, Watts DC, Read MJF (1988) Residual debris and bond strength is there a relationship? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 94:222–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Öztürk B, Malkoc S, Koyutürk AE et al (2008) Influence of different tooth types on the bond strength of two orthodontic adhesive systems. Eur J Orthod 30:407–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pickett KL, Sadowsky PL, Jacobson A et al (2001) Orthodontic in vivo bond strength: comparison with in vivo results. Angle Orthod 71:141–148

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Regan D, Noort R van (1989) Bond strengths of two integral bracket-base combinations: an in vitro comparison with foil mesh. Eur J Orthod 11:144–153

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reynolds IR (1975) Letter: Composite filling materials as adhesives in orthodontics. Br Dent J 138:83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Reynolds IR, Fraunhofer JA von (1976) Direct bonding of orthodontic attachments to teeth: the relation of adhesive bond strength to gauze mesh size. Br J Orthod 3:91–95

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rix D, Foley TF, Mamandras A (2001) Comparison of bond strength of three adhesives: composite resin, hybrid GIC and glass-filled GIC. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 119:36–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sorel O, El Alam R, Chagneau F et al (2002) Comparison of bond strength between simple foil mesh and laser-structured base retention brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 122:260–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tang ATH, Björkman L, Adamczak E et al (2000) In vitro shear bond strength of orthodontic bondings without liquid resin. Acta Odontol Scand 58:44–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Trites B, Foley TF, Banting D (2004) Bond strength comparison of 2 self-etching primers over a 3-month storage period. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 126:709–716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Velo S, Carano A, Carano A (2002) Self-etching vs. traditional bonding systems in orthodontics: an in vitro study. Orthod Craniofac Res 5:166–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vicente A, Bravo LA (2008) Influence of an etchant and a desensitizer containing benzalkonium chloride on shear bond strength of brackets. J Adhes Dent 10:205–209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We are grateful to the companies ODS (Kisdorf, Germany), Dentaurum (Ispringen, Germany), and 3M Unitek (Neuss, Germany) for their kind support.

Danksagung

Wir danken den Firmen ODS (Kisdorf), Dentaurum (Ispringen) und 3M Unitek (Neuss) für ihre freundliche Unterstützung.

Conflict of interest

The corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of interest.

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oral Medical Technology, University Hospital of Bonn, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelm Universität Bonn, Welschnonnenstr. 17, 53111, Bonn, Germany

    S. Reimann & C. Bourauel

  2. Privat Dental Practice, Cologne, Germany

    J. Mezey

  3. Department of Orthodontics, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

    N. Daratsianos & A. Jäger

Authors
  1. S. Reimann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Mezey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Daratsianos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Jäger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. Bourauel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Reimann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reimann, S., Mezey, J., Daratsianos, N. et al. The influence of adhesives and the base structure of metal brackets on shear bond strength. J Orofac Orthop 73, 184–193 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-012-0074-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-012-0074-3

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation