Master of Science
To compare the mean bond strengths and mode of bond failure,
in vitro, of
five bonding systems (MIP
1, Plastic Conditioner2, Assure2, Scotchbond3, and Transbond
1), when bonding an orthodontic bracket to an artificially-aged composite resin
restoration, with and without mechanical surface preparation with a diamond bur.
Class V buccal composite resin restorations were prepared in 240 upper right
central incisor dentoform teeth. The restorations were artificially aged for 35 days,
bonded with metal brackets, stored in distilled water at 37°C for 30 days, thermocycled
for 500 cycles, and subsequently debonded with an Instron universal testing machine.
The mean bond strengths for Transbond, MIP, Plastic Conditioner, Assure, and
Scotchbond groups were 12.1, 12.3, 13.3, 17.2, and 17.7 MPa respectively. The mean
bond strengths for Transbond+Diamond, MIP+Diamond, Plastic Conditioner+Diamond,
Assure+Diamond, and Scotchbond+Diamond groups were 18.5, 16.4, 19.1, 19.5, and
20.7 MPa respectively. ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference (P
among the groups.
Mechanically roughening the surface of a composite resin restoration with
a diamond bur, provided significantly greater bond strengths, regardless of the bonding
resin used. However, Assure and Scotchbond, without diamond bur preparation,
provided similar bond strengths to Transbond, MIP and Plastic Conditioner, with
diamond bur preparation.
3M Unitek, Monrovia CA
Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca IL
3M ESPE, St. Paul MN
Tse, Matthew, "The Effect of Surface Treatments and Bonding Agents on the Shear Bond Strengths of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded to Aged Composite Resin Restorations" (2012). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 1133.