American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Original articleBond strength of various bracket base designs☆
Section snippets
Material and methods
Six types of direct-bond maxillary premolar metal brackets with mechanical interlocking bases were available in Taiwan market at the time of this study; those brackets were selected for testing. The brackets were evaluated for various design characteristics, including whether the bracket was cast in 1 piece or welded together, base size, base type (retention groove, circular concave, or mesh), and mesh size. The brackets tested were as follows: Dynalock (Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), Accuarch
Results
The overall mean bond strengths were 9.67 ± 1.79, 8.56 ± 2.15, 8.12 ± 1.94, 7.19 ± 1.68, 5.60 ± 1.00, and 3.81 ± 1.17 kg/base for the Tomy, Dentaurum, Unitek, Leone, TP Orthodontics, and Ormco brackets, respectively (Table II). The statistical analysis of bonding strength with 1-way ANOVA gave an F value of 32.65 (ie, a statistically significant difference; P < .05). The Scheffé test was chosen (α = .05) for further analysis and comparison. The F value of 2.29 showed that there were
Discussion
The results of this study indicate that the relative bonding strength for the Tomy bracket was 9.67 kg/base or 9.32 MPa. This bracket has a relatively large base (9.9 mm2) with many circular concavities that allow air to escape so that the composite resin can penetrate into the concave surfaces (Fig, B). This resulted in better retention and relatively less debonding between the bracket and resin (35.3%) than occurred with other bracket base designs.
MacColl et al19 reported that there were no
Conclusions
- 1.
The size and design of a bracket base can affect bond strength.
- 2.
The Tomy bracket, with a circular concave base design, produced greater bond strength than the Dentaurum, Leone, TP Orthodontics, and Ormco brackets, with their mesh bases.
- 3.
Among the brackets with mesh-type bases, the larger the mesh spacing, the greater the bond strength.
- 4.
The Unitek 1-piece cast bracket with a horizontal retention groove base produced moderate bond strength.
- 5.
Most debonding interfaces are between bracket and resin and
References (20)
- et al.
Effect of an acidic primer on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(1998) - et al.
Comparison of bond strength of three adhesivescomposite resin, hybrid GIC, and glass-filled GIC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(2001) - et al.
Shear bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets with a moisture-insensitive primer
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(2001) Direct bonding metallic bracketswhere are they heading?
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
(1992)- et al.
Bonding bases coated with porous metal powdera comparison with foil mesh
Am J Orthod
(1983) Retentive shear strengths of various bonding attachment bases
Am J Orthod
(1980)- et al.
Evaluation of fourteen direct-bonding orthodontic bases
Am J Orthod
(1980) - et al.
Variables influencing the bond strength of metal orthodontic bracket bases
Am J Orthod
(1981) - et al.
Bond strength of orthodontic direct-bonding cement-bracket systems as studied in vitro
Am J Orthod
(1982) - et al.
Bonding base coated with porous metal powdera comparison with foil mesh
Am J Orthod
(1983)
Cited by (59)
Shear bond strength of adhesive precoated brackets: A comparative in vitro study
2023, International OrthodonticsEfficacy of Er, Cr: YSGG laser phosphoric acid gel and Riboflavin activated by Photodynamic therapy on enamel reconditioning rebonded to metallic brackets: An Invitro study
2022, Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic TherapyCitation Excerpt :Nevertheless, the bond strength achieved by rebonding the metallic orthodontic brackets should be analogous to the optimum bond strength prerequisite for effective orthodontic treatment [[9],[10]]. In the concrete, the brackets' high bond strength is obligatory to withstand orthodontic forces endeavoring controlled tooth movement; however, after process pursuance bracket should detach effortlessly without destructing the enamel surface [[9],[11],[12]]. Consequently, for the annihilation of adhesive resin from the enamel surface, different enamel-reconditioning approaches have been acclaimed to sustain bracket rebonding and adhesive binding capacity with minimal disruption to the tooth enamel [[10],[13],[14]].
Metal-composite adhesion based on diazonium chemistry
2017, Dental MaterialsCitation Excerpt :It should be strong enough to withstand the forces during treatment, but should enable de-bonding at the end of the treatment without damaging enamel [27], in fact bracket de-bonding usually occurs at the bracket base-cement interface [22]. Several methods were developed to improve this bond including using different bracket base designs, bracket base treatments such as sandblasting, chemical etching and the use of foil mesh bases [22,58]. In this study for the dry stored samples diazonium surface treatment increased the bond strength by 4 folds.
Comparing orthodontic bond failures of light-cured composite resin with chemical-cured composite resin: A 12-month clinical trial
2016, American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsShear bond strength of three different metal bracket base designs on human premolars: An in vitro comparative study
2024, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry
- ☆
This study was supported by a grant from the National Science Council of the Republic of China (NSC 86-2314-B-016-078).
Submitted, October 2001; revised and accepted, January 2003.