Curvature-dependent shear bond strength of different attachment materials for orthodontic lingual indirect bonding.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 08 2021
16 08 2021
Historique:
received:
25
05
2021
accepted:
03
08
2021
entrez:
17
8
2021
pubmed:
18
8
2021
medline:
18
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of different attachment materials used for lingual bonding, the influence of artificial aging and the radii of curvature of the enamel surface on SBS, 192 third molars were photographed to determine the radius of curvature of the oral surface. After phosphoric acid etching a cylindrical test piece was bonded to the oral enamel using a mold that was filled with a chemically curing (Maximum Cure, Transbond IDB Premix) or a dual-curing (Nexus NX3, RelyX Unicem2) attachment material. SBS was tested after 24 h, 500 thermal cycles or 90 days at 37 °C with a universal testing machine. Computed tomography scans were performed to determine the bonded surface and calculate SBS. Values ranged from 8.3 to 20.9 MPa. RelyX Unicem2 showed the highest SBS values at baseline, 500 thermal cycles and after 90 days (p < 0.001). Ninety days of wet storage significantly reduced SBS of Maximum Cure (p = 0.028). The radius of curvature correlated positively with SBS (r
Identifiants
pubmed: 34400744
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96164-3
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-96164-3
pmc: PMC8368096
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
16611Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Nov;124(5):593-9
pubmed: 14614428
Open Dent J. 2018 Sep 28;12:664-678
pubmed: 30369976
J Orofac Orthop. 2000;61(4):280-91
pubmed: 10961053
J Orthod. 2012 Dec;39(4):256-61
pubmed: 23269689
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992 May;101(5):414-9
pubmed: 1534199
Nat Methods. 2012 Jun 28;9(7):676-82
pubmed: 22743772
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Apr;135(4):422.e1-6; discussion 422-3
pubmed: 19361721
Korean J Orthod. 2013 Oct;43(5):235-41
pubmed: 24228238
Am J Orthod. 1984 Apr;85(4):333-40
pubmed: 6231863
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Mar;149(3):308-18
pubmed: 26926017
Angle Orthod. 2007 May;77(3):494-8
pubmed: 17465659
J Clin Orthod. 2013 Nov;47(11):661-80
pubmed: 24605392
J Orthod. 2013 Sep;40 Suppl 1:S2-7
pubmed: 24005946
Dent Mater. 2012 Jun;28(6):642-52
pubmed: 22429937
Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2017 Sep;18(3):188-192
pubmed: 29254341
Dent Mater. 2017 Feb;33(2):133-143
pubmed: 28007396
Angle Orthod. 2007 Mar;77(2):337-41
pubmed: 17319771
Angle Orthod. 2011 Jan;81(1):149-52
pubmed: 20936968
J Orthod. 2013 Sep;40 Suppl 1:S20-6
pubmed: 24005947
Am J Orthod. 1979 Dec;76(6):657-75
pubmed: 293135
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 11;13(9):e0202952
pubmed: 30204811
Angle Orthod. 2000 Oct;70(5):352-6
pubmed: 11036994
Angle Orthod. 2006 Jul;76(4):689-93
pubmed: 16808591
Dent Mater. 2010 Feb;26(2):e38-49
pubmed: 20004960
Dent Clin North Am. 2017 Oct;61(4):821-834
pubmed: 28886770
Biomater Investig Dent. 2020 Jan 29;7(1):16-24
pubmed: 32128509
Br Dent J. 1975 Feb 4;138(3):83
pubmed: 1089421
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Mar;135(3):276.e1-12; discussion 276-7
pubmed: 19268820
Open Dent J. 2013 Jul 26;7:68-75
pubmed: 23986792