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
. 2025 Apr 15;37(1-3):3.
doi: 10.1007/s44445-025-00002-5.

Comparative analysis of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics of bioactive versus conventional orthodontic adhesives: An in-vitro study

Kawthar Bukhari  1   2 , Rawan Alaydaa  2 , Rana Alhazmi  2 , Abdulaziz Alharbi  2 , Omar Alahmadi  2 , Muhammad Zafar  3   4   5 , Asim Almarhoumi  6   7
Affiliations

Comparative analysis of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics of bioactive versus conventional orthodontic adhesives: An in-vitro study

Kawthar Bukhari et al. Saudi Dent J. .

Abstract

Adhesives are essential for attaching orthodontic brackets to the tooth surface and ensuring safe removal during debonding. ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE-Restorative (ABR) is a bioactive composite with potential advantages. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE-Restorative (ABR) with conventional adhesives, including Transbond XT™ (TXT) and Orthocem™ (OC). A total of 51 human maxillary premolars were distributed randomly into three groups (n = 17). Each group was bonded with one adhesive following the manufacturer's protocols. Then were subjected to 5000 thermocycles to simulate oral conditions. SBS was measured using a universal testing machine, and ARI scores were visually analysed under magnification. Statistical analysis was conducted using one-way ANOVA and chi-squared tests, with a 0.05 level of significance. Mean SBS values were 11.26 MPa, 12.52 MPa, and 12.96 MPa for ABR, TXT, and OC, respectively, with no significant differences (p = 0.513). ARI analysis revealed significant differences (p = 0.009) as ABR predominantly exhibited ARI 3 scores, indicating no adhesive remnants on enamel. In contrast, TXT and OC groups showed higher adhesive retention. ABR demonstrated shear bond strength comparable to conventional adhesives, meeting the clinical thresholds for orthodontic use. But demonstrated more complete adhesive failure in the enamel-adhesive interface rather than cohesive failure within the adhesive material like in TXT and OC.

Keywords: Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI); Bioactive materials; Debonding characteristics; Orthodontic adhesives; Shear bond strength.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethical compliance: Ethical approval was granted by Taibah University College of Dentistry Research Ethics Committee. The study registration number is TUCDREC/030424/KBukhari. All procedures performed in studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that there was no conflict of interest on publication date.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Shear bond strength test setup for an orthodontic bracket, with a blade applying force to evaluate the adhesive bond
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI): (a) to (d) correspond with ARI score from 1 to 4. (Black arrow and outline: adhesive material. White arrow: bracket base. Red arrow and outline: enamel fragment) Note image (d) indicates an ARI score of 4, where there is excessive bond strength leading to the fracture of an enamel fragment, a sign of overly strong adhesive bonding
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Box and whisker plot for mean shear bond strength (SBS) in MPa per group: Transbond XT (TXT), Orthocem (OC) and Activa BioActive-Restorative (ABR)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Abd El Halim S (2018) Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of a bioactive composite and nano-composite: an in vitro study. Egypt Dental J 64(2):1653–9
    1. Ali NAM, Nissan LM, Khamis AH, Al-Taai N (2024) Enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets bonded with new bioactive composite (in-vitro study). J Baghdad Coll Dent 36(2):54–62
    1. Amin F, Fareed MA, Zafar MS, Khurshid Z, Palma PJ, Kumar N (2022) Degradation and stabilization of resin-dentine interfaces in polymeric dental adhesives: an updated review. Coatings 12(8):1094
    1. Bayani S, Ghassemi A, Manafi S, Delavarian M (2015) Shear bond strength of orthodontic color-change adhesives with different light-curing times. Dental Res J 12(3):265–270 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bhadra D, Shah NC, Rao AS, Dedania MS, Bajpai N (2019) A 1-year comparative evaluation of clinical performance of nanohybrid composite with Activa™ bioactive composite in Class II carious lesion: A randomized control study. J Conserv Dent Endod 22(1):92–96 - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources