Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1999 Nov;2(4):186-93.
doi: 10.1111/ocr.1999.2.4.186.

Clinical comparison between a resin-reinforced self-cured glass ionomer cement and a composite resin for direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. Part 2: Bonding on dry enamel and on enamel soaked with saliva

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Clinical comparison between a resin-reinforced self-cured glass ionomer cement and a composite resin for direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. Part 2: Bonding on dry enamel and on enamel soaked with saliva

V Cacciafesta et al. Clin Orthod Res. 1999 Nov.

Abstract

The purposes of this investigation were to compare the clinical performance of a resin-reinforced self-cured glass ionomer cement to a standard composite resin in the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets when bonded onto: a) dry teeth and b) teeth soaked with saliva. The two bonding agents were compared using a split-mouth design. In that, both systems were used for direct bonding of stainless steel brackets in every patient. Thirty-eight consecutive patients with fixed appliances were followed for a period of 12 months. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: group A (11 patients) and group B (27 patients). In group A, the performance of 220 stainless steel brackets was evaluated: 110 brackets were bonded with GC Fuji Ortho glass ionomer cement (GC Industrial Co., Tokyo, Japan) onto dry teeth, and 110 bonded with System 1+ composite resin (Ormco Corp., Glendora, CA). In group B, the performance of 540 stainless steel brackets was evaluated: 270 brackets were bonded with GC Fuji Ortho onto teeth soaked with saliva, and 270 bonded with System 1+. In group A, GC Fuji Ortho recorded an overall failure rate (34.5%) significantly higher (p < 0.05) than System 1+ (9%) when applied onto completely dry teeth. Conversely, in group B, no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between the failure rates of the two bonding agents were found when GC Fuji Ortho was used on teeth soaked with saliva. It was concluded, therefore, that GC Fuji Ortho shows clinically acceptable bond strengths when bonded onto moist teeth, but not when used on dry enamel. Both bonding agents failed mostly at the enamel/adhesive interface, without causing any enamel damage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources