Search

The objectives of the study were to isolate the bracket-cement interface, and to determine the influence of bracket base morphology and orthodontic bonding agent chosen on strength of adhesion. The bracket bases evaluated included 60, 80, and 100 single mesh bases, a double mesh base, and the Dynalock™, and Mini Twin™ bases. The strength of interface provided by each of these bases with Concise™, Transbond™, Right On™, and non-encapsulated Fuji Ortho LC™ cements, was measured in tension and recorded in Mega Pascals. The single-mesh bases performed well with either Concise or Right On (11∙88-22∙72 MPa) and, other than the 80-mesh bracket, relatively poorly with Transbond (2∙18-5∙15 MPa). With Fuji Ortho LC, the single mesh bases performed well (6∙05-12∙19 MPa). The double mesh base performed well with Right On (13∙75 MPa), and reasonably well with Concise, Transbond, and Fuji Ortho LC (6∙00-9∙20 MPa). The Dynalock and Mini Twin Bases performed fairly well with all cements (8∙87-17∙16 MPa). It was concluded that the orthodontic bonding agent selected would appear to largely determine the bond strength achieved with a particular bracket base design. A definite trend was difficult to identify in this study, and it appeared that certain combinations of bracket base and bonding agent performed optimally. Particular base designs may allow improved adhesive penetration or improved penetration of curing light. Alternatively, the dimension and distribution of resin/cement tags prescribed by one base could promote a stress distribution that is better resisted by a particular adhesive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]