The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of ultrasonic instrumentation with different scaler-tip angulations on the shear bond strength and bond failure mode of metallic orthodontic brackets

  • Received : 2013.04.09
  • Accepted : 2013.08.06
  • Published : 2014.01.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of ultrasonic instrumentation with different scaler-tip angulations on the shear bond strength (SBS) and bond failure mode of metallic orthodontic brackets. Methods: Adhesive pre-coated metallic brackets were bonded to 72 extracted human premolars embedded in autopolymerizing acrylic resin. The teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 24 each) to undergo no treatment (control group) or ultrasonic instrumentation with a scaler-tip angulation of $45^{\circ}$ ($45^{\circ}$-angulation group) or $0^{\circ}$ ($0^{\circ}$-angulation group). SBS was tested in a universal testing machine, and adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were recorded. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for statistical analysis. Results: The control group had a significantly higher mean SBS value than the treated groups, which showed no significant differences in their mean SBS values. The ARI scores were not significantly different among the groups. Conclusions: Ultrasonic instrumentation around the bracket base reduces the SBS of metallic orthodontic brackets, emphasizing the need for caution during professional oral hygiene procedures in orthodontic patients. The scaler-tip angulation does not influence the SBS reduction and bond failure mode of such brackets.

Keywords

References

  1. Ogaard B, Rolla G, Arends J. Orthodontic appliances and enamel demineralization. Part 1. Lesion development. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:68-73 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(88)90453-2
  2. Zanarini M, Pazzi E, Bonetti S, Ruggeri O, Alessandri Bonetti G, Prati C. In vitro evaluation of the effects of a fluoride-releasing composite on enamel demineralization around brackets. Prog Orthod 2012;13:10-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pio.2011.04.004
  3. Chapman JA, Roberts WE, Eckert GJ, Kula KS, Gonzalez- Cabezas C. Risk factors for incidence and severity of white spot lesions during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:188-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.10.019
  4. Atack NE, Sandy JR, Addy M. Periodontal and microbiological changes associated with the placement of orthodontic appliances. A review. J Periodontol 1996;67:78-85. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1996.67.2.78
  5. Petti S, Barbato E, Simonetti D'Arca A. Effect of orthodontic therapy with fixed and removable appliances on oral microbiota: a six-month longitudinal study. New Microbiol 1997;20:55-62.
  6. Ristic M, Vlahovic Svabic M, Sasic M, Zelic O. Clinical and microbiological effects of fixed orthodontic appliances on periodontal tissues in adolescents. Orthod Craniofac Res 2007;10:187-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2007.00396.x
  7. Park SY, Cha JY, Kim KN, Hwang CJ. The effect of casein phosphopeptide amorphous calciumphosphate on the in vitro shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Korean J Orthod 2013;43:23-8. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2013.43.1.23
  8. Gwinnett AJ, Ceen RF. Plaque distribution on bonded brackets: a scanning microscope study. Am J Orthod 1979;75:667-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(79)90098-8
  9. Checchi L, Nobili A. The importance of hygiene control in orthodontics. Prev Assist Dent 1988;14: 35-7.
  10. Gwinnett AJ, Ceen RF. Plaque distribution on bonded brackets: a scanning microscope study. Am J Orthod 1979;75:667-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(79)90098-8
  11. Sukontapatipark W, el-Agroudi MA, Selliseth NJ, Thunold K, Selvig KA. Bacterial colonization associated with fixed orthodontic appliances. A scanning electron microscopy study. Eur J Orthod 2001;23: 475-84. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/23.5.475
  12. Olin PS. Effect of prolonged ultrasonic instrumentation on the retention of cemented cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:563-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90128-Y
  13. Krell KV, Courey JM, Bishara SE. Orthodontic bracket removal using conventional and ultrasonic debonding techniques, enamel loss, and time requirements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 103:258-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(93)70007-B
  14. Boyer DB, Engelhardt G, Bishara SE. Debonding orthodontic ceramic brackets by ultrasonic instrumentation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108:262-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70019-6
  15. Bishara SE, Trulove TS. Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part I. Background and methods. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:145-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70008-Z
  16. Walmsley AD, Jones PA, Hullah W, Harrington E. Ultrasonic debonding of composite-retained restorations. Br Dent J 1989;166:290-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4806798
  17. Giulio AB, Matteo Z, Serena IP, Silvia M, Luigi C. In vitro evaluation of casein phosphopeptideamorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) effect on stripped enamel surfaces. A SEM investigation. J Dent 2009;37:228-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.11.015
  18. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/TS 11405:2003. Dental materials - Testing of adhesion to tooth structure. ISO: 2003 [cited Apr 23, 2013]. Available from: http://www.iso.org/iso/ home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm? csnumber=31486.
  19. Alessandri Bonetti G, Zanarini M, Incerti Parenti S, Lattuca M, Marchionni S, Gatto MR. Evaluation of enamel surfaces after bracket debonding: an invivo study with scanning electron microscopy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:696-702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.02.027
  20. Vicente A, Bravo LA, Romero M, Ortiz AJ, Canteras M. Adhesion promoters: effects on the bond strength of brackets. Am J Dent 2005;18:323-6.
  21. Montasser MA, Drummond JL. Reliability of the adhesive remnant index score system with different magnifications. Angle Orthod 2009;79:773-6. https://doi.org/10.2319/080108-398.1
  22. Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984;85:333-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90190-8
  23. Pont HB, Ozcan M, Bagis B, Ren Y. Loss of surface enamel after bracket debonding: an in-vivo and exvivo evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:387.e1-9; discussion 387-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.05.012
  24. Muller P, Guggenheim B, Attin T, Marlinghaus E, Schmidlin PR. Potential of shock waves to remove calculus and biofilm. Clin Oral Investig 2011;15:959-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0462-2
  25. Chapple IL, Walmsley AD, Saxby MS, Moscrop H. Effect of instrument power setting during ultrasonic scaling upon treatment outcome. J Periodontol 1995;66:756-60. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1995.66.9.756
  26. Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975;2:171-80
  27. Lombardo L, Kaplan A, Lapenta R, Bratti E, Pera C, Scuzzo G, et al. A comparative study of lingual bracket bond strength. Orthodontics (Chic.) 2011;12: 178-87.
  28. Arabaci T, Cicek Y, Canakci CF. Sonic and ultrasonic scalers in periodontal treatment: a review. Int J Dent Hyg 2007;5:2-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-5037.2007.00217.x
  29. Flemmig TF, Petersilka GJ, Mehl A, Hickel R, Klaiber B. The effect of working parameters on root substance removal using a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler in vitro. J Clin Periodontol 1998;25:158-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1998.tb02422.x

Cited by

  1. Dental Hygiene and Orthodontics: Effect of Ultrasonic Instrumentation on Bonding Efficacy of Different Lingual Orthodontic Brackets vol.2017, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3714651
  2. Effect of different surface treatments and retainer designs on the retention of posterior Pd-Ag porcelain-fused-to-metal resin-bonded fixed partial dentures vol.15, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.5630