|
 
 |
| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2012 | Volume
: 1
| Issue : 4 | Page : 249-252 |
|
Evaluation of the shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite using different adhesive systems
PS Raju1, Ankur Gupta1, Jaishree Garg2, Preeti Bhattacharya1, Deepak K Agarwal1, Abhishek Agarwal1
1 Department of Orthodontics, Institute of Dental Science, Bareilly, UP, India
2 Department of Periodontics, Institute of Dental Science, Bareilly, UP, India
| Date of Web Publication | 27-Dec-2012 |
Correspondence Address:
P S Raju
Department of Orthodontics, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/2277-8632.105117
Introduction: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effect of 3 adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of a fiber-reinforced composite (FRC).
Materials and Method: Sixty extracted premolars were randomly divided into 3 groups (each containing 20 specimens). The FRCs (Splint - it, Jeneric/Pentron) were bonded to the teeth with 3 adhesive systems Transbond XT (Unitek/3M), Tetric Flow (Ivoclar-Vivadent), and Filtek Supreme (3M ESPE). All the samples were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 hours and subsequently tested for shear bond strength (SBS). Analysis of variance and the Sheffe post-hoc tests were used at a significant level of P < .05.
Results: Analysis of variance indicated significant differences among the various groups. Fibers bonded with Transbond XT demonstrated significantly higher shear bond strength than the other 2 groups. Filtek Flow showed significantly higher shear bond strength values than Tetric Flow and lower than Transbond XT. No significant differences in debonded locations (ARI scores) were found among the groups.
Conclusion: Transbond XT can successfully be used for direct bonding of FRC, thus improving their shear bond strength. Keywords: Adhesive systems, fiber-reinforced composite, shear bond strength
How to cite this article:
Raju P S, Gupta A, Garg J, Bhattacharya P, Agarwal DK, Agarwal A. Evaluation of the shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite using different adhesive systems. J NTR Univ Health Sci 2012;1:249-52 |
How to cite this URL:
Raju P S, Gupta A, Garg J, Bhattacharya P, Agarwal DK, Agarwal A. Evaluation of the shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite using different adhesive systems. J NTR Univ Health Sci [serial online] 2012 [cited 2022 Aug 11];1:249-52. Available from: https://www.jdrntruhs.org/text.asp?2012/1/4/249/105117 |
| Introduction | |  |
An increase in the demand for enhanced esthetics among adolescents has resulted in a large number of patients seeking orthodontic care. The motivation level of a patient reduces drastically once treatment yields good cosmetic results. An alarming increase in the rate of relapse of orthodontic treatment has been a major concern of clinicians today.
During the last decade, fiber-reinforced composite was introduced as a revolutionary treatment alternative in esthetic, metal-free dentistry. Fiber-reinforced composites can be used [1] for fabrication of laboratory-made single crown, chair-side periodontal splinting, adhesive-fixed partial denture, post and core system. In orthodontics, the fiber-reinforced composite can be used for retention purpose. It can efficiently replace the removable retainers and lingual-bonded wire retainers, as it is esthetic, easy to manipulate, requires less maintenance, and has better retention. Biocompatibility is not a concern as it can be with nickel-containing stainless steel and other metals.
The performance of the fiber-reinforced composite depends on cohesive strength of polymer matrix, fiber type, volume fraction, and the quality of fiber polymer matrix interface. [2] The present study was conducted to evaluate effect of various adhesive system on shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite.
| Materials and Method | | |
The study was carried out on 60 extracted premolars, which were collected from patients who reported to the department of oral and maxillofacial surgery for therapeutic extractions prior to orthodontic treatment, and teeth were stored in a solution of 0.1% thymol (anti-microbial) for 7 days at 4 ° C. The criteria for tooth selection included intact buccal enamel with no crack from extraction and no caries. The pre-impregnated fiber-reinforced composite used in this study is Splint - it (Jeneric/Pentron).
The teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (each containing 20 specimens), and 3 adhesive systems were studied. The teeth were cleansed of soft tissue and embedded in cold curing fast setting acrylic. Before bonding, the fiber-reinforced composite specimens were cut with scissors to the size of the bonding base of standard premolar bracket (Gemini 022, 3M). The bonding procedure is shown in [Table 1].
The teeth in group 1 were etched with 37% orthophosphoric acid gel (Unitek/3M) for 30 seconds, followed by thorough washing and drying. A thin layer of primer (Transbond XT primer Unitek 3M) was applied on etched enamel and light-cured for 20 second, followed by a Transbond XT composite resin (Transbond XT Unitek/3M). Then, the fibers were bonded near the center of facial surface of the tooth with sufficient pressure to express excess adhesive and light-cured for 5 seconds. Another layer of Transbond XT resin was applied to completely cover the fiber, and then light-cured for 40 second with a visible light cure unit.
The teeth in group 2 were etched with 37% orthophosphoric acid gel (3M Unitek) for 30 seconds, followed by thorough washing and drying. A thin layer of Heliobond (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) primer was applied on the etched enamel and light-cured for 20 second, 0 followed by a layer of flowable resin (Tetric Flow Ivoclar-Vivadent). Then, the fibers (Splint-it - Jeneric /Pentron) were bonded near the center of facial surface of the tooth with sufficient pressure to express excess adhesive and light-cured for 5 seconds. Another layer of Tetric Flow resin was applied to completely cover the fiber, which was then light-cured for 40 seconds with a visible light cure unit.
The teeth in group 3 were etched with 37% orthophosphoric acid gel (3M Unitek) for 30 seconds, followed by thorough washing and drying. A thin layer of Single Bond primer was applied on the etched enamel and light-cured for 20 second, 0 followed by a layer of flowable resin (Filtek Supreme Plus Flowable restorative 3M ESPE). Then, the fibers (Splint-it - Jeneric/Pentron) were bonded near the center of facial surface of the tooth with sufficient pressure to express excess adhesive and light-cured for 5 seconds. Another layer of Filtek flowable resin was applied to completely cover the fiber, which was then light-cured for 40 seconds with a visible light cure unit.
After bonding, all samples will be stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 hours and tested in shear mode on an Instron universal testing machine. Each sample will be secured in the lower jaw of the machine so that the bonded fiber will be parallel to shear force direction. The specimens will be stressed in an occlusogingival direction. [3],[4] The adhesive remnant index (ARI) [5] will be used to assess the amount of adhesive left on the enamel surface. This scale ranges from 0 to 3. A score of 0 indicates no adhesive remaining on the tooth in the bonding area; 1 less than half the bonded area covered by the adhesive; 2 more than half the bonded area covered by the adhesive; and 3 adhesive remaining on the entire bonded area.
Statistical analysis
Descriptive statistics including mean, standard deviation, median, and minimum and maximum values were calculated for each group. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) will be applied to determine whether significant differences in debonding values exist among the group. For post hoc testing, a Scheffé's test was used.
The chi-square test was used to determine significant differences in the ARI scores among the different groups. Significance for all statistical tests was predetermined at P < 0.05.
| Results | | |
Descriptive statistics for shear bond strength are presented in [Table 2]. The results of the ANOVA indicated the presence of significant differences among the various groups (P = 0.001). The post hoc test showed that fibers bonded with the Transbond XT adhesive system had significantly higher bond strengths than the other groups (P = 0.001). Filtek Flow showed significantly higher shear bond strength values than Tetric Flow and lower than Transbond XT (P < 0.05). | Table 2: Descriptive statistics in megapascals of shear bond strengths of the three groups tested
Click here to view |
The ARI scores for the 3 groups tested are listed in [Table 3]. The chi-square test results indicated no significant differences in debond location (ARI score) among the various groups (P > 0.05).  | Table 3: Frequency of distribution of adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores
Click here to view |
| Discussion | | |
Previous studies have evaluated the mechanical properties and clinical use of fiber-reinforced composites for orthodontic purposes. [6],[7],[8] Fiber-reinforced composites have the potential to replace metals in clinical orthodontics. Unlike metals, a fiber-reinforced composite has good bonding characteristics, not only to the tooth but also to the appliance itself. [9] A fiber-reinforced composite can be bonded to another fiber-reinforced composite, and attachments can be added directly on to it.
In orthodontics, fiber-reinforced composite application [10] include fixed orthodontic retention appliance, [11] fixed space maintainers, and post-traumatic stabilization splint. Apart from this, fiber-reinforced composite can also be used for enhancing anchorage and for active tooth movement. [6]
In the present investigation, fiber-reinforced composites, bonded with the Transbond XT adhesive system, showed significantly higher shear bond strength than fiber-reinforced composites bonded with the other 2 groups. A previous study that evaluated the effects of various adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composites also showed that fiber-reinforced composites produced significantly higher shear bond strength when bonded using Transbond XT rather than other adhesives. [12]
Reynolds [13] suggested that minimum bond strength of 6-8 MPa was adequate for most clinical orthodontic needs because these values are considered to be able to withstand masticatory and orthodontic forces. In the present research, the bond strengths of all groups were above these limits.
No significant differences in debond locations (ARI score) were found among the various groups. The teeth in groups had higher frequency of ARI score 0, indicating that no adhesive remained on the tooth in the bonding area.
| Conclusion | | |
The present study demonstrated:
- Fibers bonded with Transbond XT demonstrated a significantly higher SBS than the other 2 groups.
- Filtek Flow showed significantly higher shear bond strength values than Tetric Flow and lower than Transbond XT.
- No significant differences in debonded locations (ARI) scores were found among the groups.
| References | | |
| 1. | Lassila LV, Tezvergil A, Lahdenpera M, Alander P, Shinya A, Vallittu PK. Evaluation of some properties of two fiber reinforced composite materials. Acta Odontol Scand 2005;63:196-204. 
|
| 2. | Alander P, Lassila LV, Tezvergil A, Vallittu PK. Acoustic emission analysis of fiber reinforced composite in flexural testing. Dent Mater 2004;20:305-12.
[PUBMED] |
| 3. | Jobalia SB, Valente RM, de Rijk WG, BeGole EA, Evans CA. Bond strength of visible light-cured glass ionomer orthodontic cement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:205-8.
[PUBMED] |
| 4. | Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, De Angelis M, Scribante A, Klersy C. Effect of water and saliva contamination on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with conventional, hydrophilic, and self-etching primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:633-40.
[PUBMED] |
| 5. | Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid etch enamel pre treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1984;85:333-40.
[PUBMED] |
| 6. | Freudenthaler JW, Tischier GK, Burstone CJ. Bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite bars for orthodontic attachment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:648-53.
|
| 7. | Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Lena A, Scribante A, Vallittu PK, Lassilae LV. Flexural strengths of fibre-reinforced composites polymerized with conventional light-curing and additional postcuring. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:524-7.
|
| 8. | Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Lena A, Scribante A, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Force levels of fibre-reinforced composites and orthodontic stainless steel wires: A 3-point bending test. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:410-3.
[PUBMED] |
| 9. | Burstone CJ, Kuhlberg AJ. Fiber reinforced composite in orthodontics. J Clin orthod 2000;24:271-9.
|
| 10. | Karaman AI, Kirn Bellis. Four application of reinforced polyethylene fiber material in orthodontic practice. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;121:650-4.
|
| 11. | Patel A, Burstone CJ, Goldberg AJ. Clinical study of fiber reinforced thermoplastics as orthodontic retainer. J Dent Res 1992;71:526.
|
| 12. | Scribante A, Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF. Effect of various adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of fibre-reinforced composite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:224-7.
[PUBMED] |
| 13. | Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. British Journal of Orthodontics 1975;2:171-8.
|
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]
|
Search Pubmed for