Einflussfaktoren auf die Haftfestigkeiten neuer und unterschiedlich recycelter Brackets

Brigitte Wendl; Peter Muchitsch; Norbert Jakse

doi:10.1055/a-0966-5791

Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie, Table of Contents

Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2020; 52(01): 13-16
DOI: 10.1055/a-0966-5791

Originalarbeit

Einflussfaktoren auf die Haftfestigkeiten neuer und unterschiedlich recycelter Brackets

Factors Influencing the Adhesion of New and Differently Recycled Brackets

Brigitte Wendl

¹Klinische Abteilung für Orale Chirurgie und Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinik für Zahnmedizin und Mundgesundheit, Graz, Österreich

,

Peter Muchitsch

¹Klinische Abteilung für Orale Chirurgie und Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinik für Zahnmedizin und Mundgesundheit, Graz, Österreich

,

Norbert Jakse

¹Klinische Abteilung für Orale Chirurgie und Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinik für Zahnmedizin und Mundgesundheit, Graz, Österreich

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Arbeit war die Messung der Haftfestigkeiten neuer und unterschiedlich recycelter Brackets unter Verwendung verschiedener Kleber auf intakter Schmelzoberfläche und bei Wiederholungsklebung sowie die elektronenmikroskopische Beurteilung der Bracketbasen.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to measure the adhesion of new and differently recycled brackets using different adhesives on an intact and rebonded enamel surface and the electron microscopic assessment of the bracket bases.

Schlüsselwörter

Haftfestigkeit - Bracketrecycling

Key words

Adhesion - Bracket recycling

Full Text

References

Literatur
1 O`Brien KD, Read MJF, Sandison RJ. et al. A visible light-activated direct-bonding material: an in vivo comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 95: 348-351
2 Mizrahi E. Success and failure of banding and bonding: a clinical study. Angle Orthod 1982; 52: 113-117
3 Read MJF, O’Brien KD. A clinical trial of an indirect bonding technique with a visible light-cured adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990; 98: 259-262
4 Kinch AP, Taylor H, Warltier R. et al. A clinical trial comparing the failure rates of directly bonded brackets using etch times of 15 or 60 seconds. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94: 476-483
5 Legler LR, Reteif DH, Bradley EL. Effects of phosphoric acid concentration and etch duration on enamel depth of etch: An in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990; 98: 154-160
6 Oliver RG. A new instrument for debonding clean-up. J Clin Orthod 1991; 25: 407-410
7 O’Brien KD, Watts DC, Read MJF. Residual debris and bond strength – is there a relationship?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94: 222-230
8 Surmont P, Dermaut L, Martens L. et al. Comparisons in shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets between five bonding systems related to different etching times: an in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 101: 414-419
9 Faust JB, Grego GN, Fan PL. et al. Penetration coefficient and bond strength of thirteen direct bonding cements. Am J Orthod 1978; 73: 512-525
10 Matasa CG. Pros and cons of the reuse of direct bonded appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 96: 72-76
11 Shiau JY, Rasmussen ST, Phelps AE. et al. An analysis of the “shear” bond strength of pretreated aged composites used in some indirect bonding techniques. Journal of Dental Research 1993; 72: 1291-1297
12 Boyer DB, Chan KC, Reinhardt JW. Build-up and repair of light-cured composites: bond strength. Journal Dental Research 1984; 63: 1241-1244
13 Saunders WP. Effect of fatigue upon the interfacial bond strength of repaired composit resins. Journal of Dentistry 1990; 18: 158-162
14 Vankerckhoven H, Lambrechts P, Van Beylen M. et al. Unreacted methacrylate groups on the surfaces of composite resins. Journal of Dental Research 1982; 61: 791-795
15 Puckett AD, Holder R, O’Hara JW. Strength of posterior composite repairs using different composite/bonding agent combinations. Operative Dentistry 1991; 16: 136-140
16 Gregory WA, Pounder B, Bakus E. Bond strengths of chemically dissimilar repaired composite resins. Journal Prosthetic Dentistry 1990; 64: 664-668
17 Lastumäki TM, Kallio TT, Vallittu PK. The bond strength of ligth-curing composite resin to finally polymerized and aged glass fiber-reinforced composite substrate. Biomaterials 2002; 23: 4533-4539
18 Klocke A, Shi J, Vaziri F. et al. Effect of Time on Bond Strength in Indirect Bonding. Angle Orthod 2004; 74-2: 245-249
19 Evans LB, Powers JM. Factors affecting in vitro bond strength of no-mix orthodontic cements. Am J Orthod 1985; 87: 508-512
20 Retief DH, Denys FR. Finishing of enamel surfaces after debonding orthodontic attachments. Angle Orthod 1979; 49: 1-10
21 Walmsley AD, Jones PA, Hullah W. Ultrasonic debonding of composite-retained restorations. British Dental Journal 1989; 166: 290-294
22 Zachrisson BU, Artun J. Enamel surface appearance after various debonding techniques. Am J Orthod 1979; 75: 121-137
23 Reynolds IR. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975; 2: 171-178