Ceramic brackets : debonding effect on enamel
Date
2006
DOI
Authors
Virk, Mahadeep Singh
Version
OA Version
Citation
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of orthodontic bracket debonding on the enamel surface using five different types of new ceramic bracket systems. A second objective was to evaluate the differences in the location of bond failure. Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI)was used to assess the amount of residual resin on the tooth surface after debonding. A new scale was designed to take the location and any damage to the enamel surface as well as to the bracket into consideration.
The five types of Ceramic Brackets used in the project were designated into five categories denoted as follow: A. 20/40 ceramic bracket (American Orthodontics, WI), B. Inspire Ice (Ormco Corporation, CA), C. Mystique (GAC, NY), D. Fascination[R] (Dentaurum, Germany), E. Fascination[R] 2 (Dentaurum, Germany). Seventy five (75) extracted human molars were randomly selected. All the teeth were equally divided into five (5) groups of fifteen (15) teeth each for each ceramic bracket type. Pre and post debonding picture was taken at a 1OX magnification. Each sample was bonded using 3M Transbond XT adhesive. Each sample was subjected to thermocycling. Each sample was subjected to debonding force using Instron Testing Machine. Adhesive remnant index score was calculated and calculations were also done based on the new scale designed for this study. Statistical analysis of the debond strength results between all the groups was performed using one way ANOVA with post hoc test for multiple comparison at a significance level of [alpha]= 0.05. Descriptive statistics were also generated using Microsoft Excel XP. Additional analysis was performed to compare the debond type, new scale and ARJ among the different groups of ceramic brackets.
The results showed that at a .05 significance level there is a statistically significant difference in the mean bond strengths of Fascination[R] and the rest of the sample groups, namely, 20/40, Inspire Ice, Mystique and Fascination[R] 2. There is no statistically significant difference in the mean debond strength between 20/40, Inspire Ice and Mystique. Fascination[R] 2 has statistically significance difference in mean debond strength from the rest of the sample groups at a .05 significance level. The high ARI score (4, 5) displayed by Fascination[R] and Fascination[R] 2 indicates primarily debonding at the Enamel-Adhesive interface. According to ARI score 20/40 ceramic bracket and Mystique have scores showing that approximately 60% of the samples ranging between 1 and 2. This means that approximately 60% of the samples had debonding interface of Bracket-Adhesive. Fascination[R] exhibited one sample with enamel damage (debond strength 503.87 kgf/cm2). Fascination[R] 2 ceramic bracket system exhibited four samples out of fourteen with enamel damage (mean debond strength 281.09 [plus or minus] 51.20 kgf/cm2). Approximately 46% of the 20/40 ceramic bracket samples exhibited bracket damage. Approximately 14% of the Mystique samples presented with bracket damage. Fascination[R] showed approximately 78% of samples with bracket damage. Inspire Ice exhibited neither enamel damage and nor bracket damage.
Description
PLEASE NOTE: This work is protected by copyright. Downloading is restricted to the BU community: please click Download and log in with a valid BU account to access. If you are the author of this work and would like to make it publicly available, please contact open-help@bu.edu.
Thesis (MSD)--Boston University, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 2006.
Includes bibliographical references: leaves 80-83.
Thesis (MSD)--Boston University, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 2006.
Includes bibliographical references: leaves 80-83.
License
This work is protected by copyright. Downloading is restricted to the BU community. If you are the author of this work and would like to make it publicly available, please contact open-help@bu.edu.