Journals / Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3

COMPARISON OF SELF-ETCH AND CONVENTIONAL ACID-ETCH TECHNIQUES IN ORTHODONTIC BONDING PROCESS

ORTODONTİK BONDİNG İŞLEMİNDE SELF-ETCH PRİMER VE KONVANSİYONEL ASİT-ETCH TEKNİKLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Pages
452–457
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Apart from these, studies about the effects of salivary contamination on the bond strength exist

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In recent years, new adhesive methods have been replaced with conventional bonding methods which are used for bonding orthodontic attachments, protecting teeth and saving time.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Therefore; with the developing of the bonding procedures, new selfetching primers have been introduced.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Apart from these, studies about the effects of salivary contamination on the bond strength exist
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In recent years, new adhesive methods have been replaced with conventional bonding methods which are used for bonding orthodontic attachments, protecting teeth and saving time. Therefore; with the developing of the bonding procedures, new selfetching primers have been introduced. The advantages of the self-etching primers are; shorten application time due to not including acid-etching and washing processes, reducing salivary contamination because of easy application and fewer moisture sensibility. In the literature, conventional acid-etching and self-etching techniques are compared with regard to shear bond strength, adhesive remnant index scores, mean bonding time and survival period on teeth. Apart from these, studies about the effects of salivary contamination on the bond strength exist

Özet

Son zamanlarda ortodontik ataşmanları yapıştırmak için, dişi koruyan ve zaman kazandıran adeziv değiştirmeye başlamıştır. Böylece bonding prosedürleri geliştikçe, self-etching primerler tanıtılmıştır. Selfetching primerlerin avantajları; asitleme ve yıkama işlemlerini içermediğinden kısalan uygulama zamanı, kolay uygulanması nedeniyle tükrük kontaminasyonu olasılığını azaltması ve nem hassasiyetinin az olmasıdır. Literatürde konvansiyonel asit-etch ile self-etch teknikleri; bağlanma dayanıklılığı, adeziv remnant indeks skorları, ortalama bonding süresi, diş yüzeyinde kalma süresi bakımından karşılaştırılmıştır. Bunların dışında tükrük kontaminasyonun bond dayanıklılığı üzerindeki etkileriyle de ilgili çalışmalar bulunmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

ATİK, E., CİĞER, S. (2022). COMPARISON OF SELF-ETCH AND CONVENTIONAL ACID-ETCH TECHNIQUES IN ORTHODONTIC BONDING PROCESS. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3, 452–457. https://ajindex.com/articles/452242

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acyrilic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955; 34:849-53
  2. Newman GV. Epoxy adhesives for orthodontic attachments: Progress report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1965; 51:901-12
  3. Püşman E. Farklı Mikroadeziv ve Retantif Preparasyon Tekniklerinin Termal Ajitasyona Uğratılmış Travmatize Ön Diş Kırıklarında İmpakt Kuvvetlerine Dayanımının İn Vitro Koşullarda İncelenmesi. HÜ Diş Hek Fak Sağlık Bil Enst, Ankara, 2009
  4. Kramer PF, Zelante F, Simionato MR. The immediate and long-term effects of invasive and noninvasive pit and fissure sealing techniques on the microflora in occlusal fissures of human teeth. Pediatr Dent 1993; 15:108-12. 5. Øgaard B, Rolla G, Arends J. Orthodontic appliances and enamel demineralization: Part 1. Lesion development. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94:68-73
  5. Gorelick L, Geiger AM, Gwinnett AJ. Incidence of white spot formation after bonding and banding. Am J Orthod 1982; 81:93-8
  6. Eliades T. Orthodontic materials research and applications: part 1.Current status and projected future developments in bonding and adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130:445- 51
  7. Keim RG, Gottlieb EL, Nelson AH, Vogels DS. Study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures. Part 1. Results and trends. J Clin Orthod 2008;32:625-41
  8. Swartz ML. Why prophy prior to bracket bonding?. Clin Impressions 1994;3-11
  9. Gürbüz T, Yılmaz Y, Güler Ç. Kendinden pürüzlendiren iki bağlayıcının uygulama farklılıklarının mikrosızıntı üzerine etkisinin değerlendirilmesi. Atatürk Üniv. Diş Hek. Fak. Derg 2007; 17:19-28
  10. Burgess AM, Sherriff M, Ireland AJ. Self-etching primers: is prophylactic pumicing necessary? A randomized clinical trial. Angle Orthod 2006; 76:114-8
  11. Lill DJ, Lindauer SJ, Tüfekçi E, Shroff B. Importance of pumice prophylaxis for bonding with self-etch primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133:423-6
  12. Lopez JI. Retentive shear strengths of various bonding attachment bases. Am J Orthod 1980; 77:669-78
  13. Buonocore MG. Principles of Adhesive Retention and Adhesive Restorative Materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1963; 67:382-91
  14. Keizer CJ, Arends J. Direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod 1976; 69:318-27
  15. Bowen RL, Rodrıguez MS. Tensile strength and modulus of elasticity of tooth structure and several restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1962; 64:378-87
  16. Retief DH. Failure at the dental adhesive-etched e