dc.contributor.author | Arhun, Neslihan | |
dc.contributor.author | Arman, Ayca | |
dc.contributor.author | Cehreli, Sevi Burcak | |
dc.contributor.author | Arikan, Serdr | |
dc.contributor.author | Karabulut, Erdem | |
dc.contributor.author | Gulsahi, Kamran | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-12-12T06:25:21Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-12-12T06:25:21Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0003-3219 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.2319/101805-368 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11655/16275 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: To assess microleakage of a tooth-adhesive-bracket complex when metal or ceramic brackets were bonded with a conventional and an antibacterial self-etching adhesive. Materials and Methods: Forty freshly extracted human premolars were randomly assigned to four equal groups and received the following treatments: group 1 = Transbond XT + metal bracket, group 2 = Transbond XT + ceramic bracket, group 3 = Clearfil Protect Bond + ceramic bracket, and group 4 = Clearfil Protect Bond + metal bracket. After photopolymerization, the teeth were kept in distilled water for I month and thereafter subjected to thermal cycling (500 cycles). Specimens were further sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for marginal microleakage for the adhesive-tooth and bracket-adhesive interfaces from incisal and gingival margins. Statistical analysis was accomplished by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test with Bonferroni correction. Results: All groups demonstrated microleakage between the adhesive-enamel and bracket-adhesive interfaces. A significant difference was observed among all groups (P <.05) for the microleakage between the bracket-adhesive interface. Metal brackets exhibited significantly more microleakage than did ceramic brackets between the bracket-adhesive interface with either of the adhesives. Clearfil Protect Bond exhibited results similar to Transbond XT. Clearfil Protect Bond may be a choice of adhesive in bracket bonding because of its antibacterial activity and similar microleakage results with the orthodontic adhesive. Conclusions: Metal brackets cause more leakage between an adhesive-bracket interface, which may lead to lower clinical shear bond strength and white-spot lesions. | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | E H Angle Education Research Foundation, Inc | |
dc.relation.isversionof | 10.2319/101805-368 | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
dc.subject | Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine | |
dc.title | Microleakage Beneath Ceramic And Metal Brackets Bonded With A Conventional And An Antibacterial Adhesive System | |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
dc.relation.journal | Angle Orthodontist | |
dc.contributor.department | Biyoistatistik | |
dc.identifier.volume | 76 | |
dc.identifier.issue | 6 | |
dc.identifier.startpage | 1028 | |
dc.identifier.endpage | 1034 | |
dc.description.index | WoS | |