Orthodontic bracket bonding with a plasma-arc light and resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement

In vitro lingual bracket evaluation of indirect bonding with plasma arc, LED and halogen light

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) of indirect bonded lingual brackets using xenon plasma arc light, light-emitting diode (LED) and conventional quartz-tungsten-halogen light.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Lingual brackets were bonded indirectly to 60 premolars divided to three groups according to the curing light used: Group 1, plasma arc for 6 s; Group 2, LED for 10 s; and Group 3, halogen light for 40 s. After bonding, the specimens were subjected to a shear force until debonding. The debonding pattern was assessed and classified according to the ARI scores. The mean shear bond strengths were accessed by anova followed by the Student-Newman-Keuls test for multiple comparisons. ARI scores were assessed using the chi-square test.

RESULTS

The three groups showed significant differences (p < 0.001), with the averages of group 1 < group 2 < group 3. Groups showed no differences regarding ARI scores.

CONCLUSION

Bonding lingual brackets indirectly with plasma arc, during 60% of the time used for the LED, produced lower SBS than obtained with the latter. Using LED during 25% of the time of the halogen light produced lower SBS than obtained with the latter. These differences did not influence the debonding pattern and are clinically acceptable according to the literature.

Effect of light-tip distance on the shear bond strengths of resin-modified glass ionomer cured with high-intensity halogen, light-emitting diode, and plasma arc lights

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of light-tip distance on the shear bond strength and the failure site of brackets cured with 3 light-curing units (high-intensity halogen, light-emitting diode, and plasma arc).

METHODS

One hundred thirty-five bovine mandibular permanent incisors were randomly allocated to 9 groups of 15 specimens each. Stainless steel brackets (Victory Series, Unitek/3M, Monrovia, Calif) were bonded with a resin-modified glass-ionomer (Fuji Ortho LC, GC Europe, Leuven, Belgium) to the teeth, and each curing light was tested at 3 distances from the bracket: 0, 3, and 6 mm. After bonding, all samples were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 hours and subsequently tested for shear bond strength.

RESULTS

When the 3 light-curing units were compared at a light-tip distance of 0mm, they showed no significantly different shear bond strengths. At a light-tip distance of 3 mm, no significant differences were found between the halogen and plasma arc lights, but both lights showed significantly higher shear bond strengths than the light-emitting diode light. At a light-tip distance of 6 mm, no significant differences were found between the halogen and light-emitting diode lights, but both showed significantly lower bond strengths than the plasma arc light. When the effect of the light-tip distance on each light-curing unit was evaluated, the halogen and light-emitting diode lights showed no significant differences among the 3 distances. However, the plasma arc light produced significantly higher shear bond strengths at a greater light-tip distance. No significant differences were found among the adhesive remnant index scores of the various groups, except with the LED light at a distance of 3 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

In hard-to-reach areas, the plasma arc curing light is suggested for optimal curing efficiency.

Effect of Thermocycling on Interfacial Gap-formation in Class V Cavities and Mechanical Properties of Spherical Silica Filler Addition to Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Restorations

The effects of thermocycling at 20,000 cycles and addition of silanized spherical silica filler (SF) on resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) restorations were investigated. A RMGIC added with an untreated spherical silica filler (UF) was used as a comparison. Marginal gaps in Class V tooth cavities, compressive strength, diametral tensile strength, flexural strength, and shear bond strengths to enamel and dentin were examined. All thermocycled samples showed decreased frequency of marginal gap formation as compared to the 24-hour samples, with reduction of 73% to 95%. At the immediate condition, after 24 hours, and after thermocycling, the addition of 10 wt% SF yielded the most favorable results in terms of marginal gap formation in Class V cavities, compressive strength, flexural strength, and shear bond strength to enamel. Diametral tensile strength and flexural strength were also increased significantly by the addition of 5 wt% SF. Further, shear bond strength tests showed that the addition of SF had no effect on bonding capability to enamel and dentin.

Light-curing time reduction with a new high-power halogen lamp

INTRODUCTION

Orthodontic brackets are routinely bonded with light-cured adhesives. Conventional halogen lights used in bonding have the disadvantage of a long curing time, and the available alternatives (laser and plasma lights) are expensive. Our aim was to investigate the minimum time necessary to bond brackets with a new, relatively low-priced, high-power halogen light.

METHODS

Five groups of 15 deciduous bovine incisors were bonded with stainless steel brackets (Mini Diamond Twin, Ormco, Orange, Calif) by using different lamps and curing times. Three of the groups were bonded by using a high-power halogen light (Swiss Master Light, Electro Medical Systems, Nyon, Switzerland) for 2, 3, and 6 seconds, respectively. The fourth group, bonded with a fast halogen light (Optilux 501, Sybron Dental Specialties, Danbury, Conn) for 40 seconds, served as the positive control group. The fifth group, the comparison group, was bonded with a plasma light (Remecure, Remedent, Deurle, Belgium) for 4 seconds. After storage for 24 hours in the dark at 37 degrees C in water, shear bond strength was measured with a universal testing machine.

RESULTS

A curing time of 2 seconds with the high-power halogen light negatively affected the bond strength and the probability of bond survival. The adhesive remnant index scores were not significantly different among the groups. Most failures (> 60%) occurred at the bracket base/adhesive interface.

CONCLUSIONS

The high-power halogen light seems to be a cost-effective solution to reducing curing time. The recommended curing times to bond stainless steel brackets are 6 seconds and, with caution, even 3 seconds.

Effect of different light sources and guides on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with 2 adhesive systems

INTRODUCTION

This study assessed the effect of different light sources and light guides on the shear bond strength and failure site of orthodontic brackets bonded with 2 adhesive systems (Quick Cure [Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, Ill] and Transbond XT [3M/Unitek, Monrovia, Calif]).

METHODS

Ninety bovine permanent mandibular incisors were randomly divided into 6 groups according to the adhesive system and light-curing procedure used. Each group consisted of 15 specimens; 90 stainless steel brackets were bonded to the teeth. Each adhesive system was light-cured with a halogen light (Ortholux XT, 3M/Unitek) for 20 seconds and the conventional light guide as controls. The remaining groups were cured with a halogen light (Ortho 2000 [Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, Ill]) and a Power Slot light guide (Reliance Orthodontic Products) for 6 and 10 seconds. After bonding, all samples were stored in distilled water for 24 hours and then tested in a shear mode on a universal testing machine.

RESULTS

No significant differences in terms of bond strength values were found among the 6 groups, but significant differences in debond locations were found among the 6 groups tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Power Slot light guides can be recommended as advantageous alternatives for fast-curing composite resins during orthodontic bonding.

Plasma arc versus halogen light-curing of adhesive-precoated orthodontic brackets: A 12-month clinical study of bond failures

The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the performance of adhesive-precoated brackets cured with 2 different light-curing units (conventional halogen light and plasma arc light). Thirty patients treated with fixed appliances were included in the investigation. Each patient's mouth was divided by the split-mouth design into 4 quadrants. In 15 randomly selected patients, the maxillary left and mandibular right quadrants were cured with the halogen light, and the remaining quadrants were cured with the plasma arc light. In the other 15 patients, the quadrants were inverted. A total of 600 adhesive precoated stainless steel brackets were examined: 300 were cured with a conventional halogen light for 20 seconds, and the others were cured with the plasma arc light for 5 seconds. The number, cause, and date of bracket failures were recorded for each light-curing unit over 12 months. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, and the log-rank test. No statistically significant differences in bond failure rates were found between the adhesive-precoated brackets cured with the halogen light and those cured with the plasma arc light; neither were any significant differences in performance found with each light-curing unit between the maxillary and mandibular arches. Plasma arc lights can be considered an advantageous alternative to conventional light curing, because they enable the clinician to reduce the curing time of adhesive-precoated orthodontic brackets without significantly affecting their bond failure rate.

Plasma arc versus halogen light curing of orthodontic brackets: a 12-month clinical study of bond failures

The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of brackets cured with 2 different light-curing units (conventional halogen light and plasma arc light); 83 patients treated with fixed appliances were included in the study. With the "split-mouth" design, each patient's mouth was divided into 4 quadrants. In 42 randomly selected patients, the maxillary left and mandibular right quadrants were cured with the halogen light, and the remaining quadrants were cured with the plasma arc light. In the other 41 patients, the quadrants were inverted. A total of 1434 stainless steel brackets were examined: 717 were cured with a conventional halogen light for 20 seconds; the remaining 717 were cured with the plasma arc light for 5 seconds. The number, cause, and date of bracket failures were recorded for each light-curing unit over 12 months. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fisher exact test, the Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, and the log-rank test. No statistically significant differences were found between the total bond failure rates of the brackets cured with the halogen light and those cured with the plasma arc light. Neither were significant differences found when the clinical performances of the maxillary versus mandibular arches or the anterior versus posterior segments were compared. These findings demonstrate that plasma arc lights are an advantageous alternative to conventional light curing, because they significantly reduce the curing time of orthodontic brackets without affecting the bond failure rate.

Clinical trial comparing plasma arc and conventional halogen curing lights for orthodontic bonding

The purpose of this clinical trial was to evaluate the reliability and time saved with a plasma arc curing unit (Apollo 95E, Dental/Medical Diagnostic Systems, Woodland Hills, Calif) compared with a conventional curing unit (Ortholux XL 3000, 3M Unitek, St Paul, Minn) for direct bracket bonding with resin adhesive. Forty-five patients were involved in the study, and 608 brackets were bonded in a contralateral quadrant pattern. The patients were followed for a mean (+/- standard deviation) period of 11 +/- 3.2 months. Survival analysis was carried out to compare the failure rate for the 2 techniques. The time required for bonding with each technique was also recorded. The mean survival time was 399 days, and there were no significant differences in survival time between the 2 bonding methods. Twelve bonding failures were reported with each technique. The curing time per bracket was significantly reduced with the plasma curing light compared with a conventional curing unit (65 +/- 19 vs 82 +/- 31 seconds). The plasma arc curing light can save chair-time without affecting the bonding failure rate.

Plasma arc curing of ceramic brackets: an evaluation of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics

The aim of this in vitro investigation was to evaluate bond strength and debonding characteristics when a xenon plasma arc curing light is used to bond polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets. Brackets were bonded to 240 extracted bovine mandibular incisors with a composite adhesive. Curing intervals of 1, 3, and 6 seconds were chosen for curing with the plasma arc light, and the control group was cured at 10 seconds per bracket with a conventional halogen light. Debonding was performed on a universal testing machine and according to the bracket manufacturers' recommendations. Both the polycrystalline and the monocrystalline brackets consistently debonded at the bracket-adhesive interface, regardless of debonding method, curing interval, or curing light. No enamel fractures were observed after debonding. Bracket fractures were rare and did not affect debonding. Bond strength was significantly higher for the monocrystalline brackets (P <.0001): mean shear bond strength ranged between 9.68 +/- 2.17 MPa (plasma arc curing light, 1 sec curing interval) and 10.73 +/- 3.22 MPa (halogen light, 10 sec curing interval) for the polycrystalline brackets and between 19.85 +/- 2.97 MPa (plasma arc curing light, 1 sec curing interval) and 22.94 +/- 3.20 MPa (plasma arc curing light, 3 sec curing interval) for the monocrystalline brackets. Significant differences were also found for the curing methods used (P =.047). A curing interval of 3 seconds with the plasma arc curing light is recommended for both polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets.

Polymerization of orthodontic adhesives using modern high-intensity visible curing lights

This study was undertaken to assess the efficacy of 3 visible curing lights: a conventional halogen light and 2 high-intensity halogen lights in the polymerization of a polymer-based and resin-modified glass ionomer orthodontic cement. Degree of polymerization was measured by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and the development of mechanical properties by Barcol hardness. The results were analyzed with either 2- or 3-way analysis of variance. It was shown that, for the polymer-based material, there was a significant increase in degree of cure and hardness with time of application of the light for each light source. For chemical conversion, there was no significant difference between the lights. However, there was a difference in hardness: the higher intensity lights produced greater hardness in shorter time. Thus, there was poor correlation between degree of polymerization and hardness. For the resin-modified glass ionomer, similar trends were found, but there was a difference in hardness between the top and the bottom of the specimens. It was concluded that the higher intensity lights could aid in the more rapid development of mechanical properties of the tested adhesives.

Plasma arc curing lights for orthodontic bonding

Xenon plasma arc lights were introduced recently for light-cured orthodontic bonding. Compared with a conventional tungsten-quartz-halogen light source, these high-intensity lights promise a dramatic reduction in curing time. The purpose of this in vitro investigation was to evaluate bond strength with 2 commercially available plasma arc lights and reduced curing intervals. Brackets were bonded to 150 extracted human teeth (75 premolars, 75 incisors) with a composite adhesive. Intervals of 2 and 6 seconds were used for curing with the plasma arc lights; a control group was bonded with a halogen light source and 20 seconds of light exposure per bracket. Bond strength testing was performed with a universal testing machine. A substantial reduction in curing time was possible with both plasma arc units. Significantly lower bond strength values were found for premolar brackets bonded with plasma arc curing lights and the shortest curing interval of 2 seconds compared with the longer curing time of 6 seconds or the standard curing time with the halogen light. Although 2 seconds of curing might be adequate to achieve acceptable bond strength values for the incisors, the Weibull analysis indicated a higher probability of bond failure for premolar brackets in particular. Six seconds of curing time is recommended for bonding stainless steel brackets with xenon plasma arc light sources.