An evaluation of a light-curing composite for bracket placement.

C De Saeytijd; C E Carels; E Lesaffre

doi:10.1093/ejo/16.6.541

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7720799

An evaluation of a light-curing composite for bracket placement.

C De Saeytijd·C E Carels·E Lesaffre

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In this study the clinical usefulness of a light-curing (Heliosit) and a chemically-curing composite (Concise) for orthodontic bracket bonding were compared. A sample of 37 patients to be treated with full Edgewise (FE) appliance in one or both arches (in total 52 dental arches) were randomly selected to have brackets on the left or right side of the dental arch bonded either with Concise or with Heliosit. In 12 patients, two teeth were extracted before orthodontic treatment and 25 patients were treated non-extraction. Impressions (Impregum) of the tooth surface and the bracket were made immediately after bracket loss. Frequency scores of bracket loss were noted for both composites and scanning microscopic evaluation of the tooth/composite surface was performed. Significant differences in bracket loss could be demonstrated between the two composites as a whole, and between the anterior and posterior parts of the dentition. For Heliosit bracket loss was observed predominantly in the posterior region, while for Concise it was distributed more equally over the dental arches. It was, however, demonstrated that in the clinical situation of bracket bonding the chemically-cured Concise failed significantly less than Heliosit in the overall frequency score.

Explore related subjects

Bicuspid Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate Composite Resins Cuspid Dental Bonding Equipment Failure Evaluation Studies as Topic Humans Incisor Orthodontic Brackets Resin Cements Stress, Mechanical Tooth Movement Techniques Clinical Trial Comparative Study Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

C De Saeytijd, C E Carels, E Lesaffre. 1994. An evaluation of a light-curing composite for bracket placement.. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo%2F16.6.541

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Evaluation of the surface free energy on root canal dentine walls treated with chelating agents and NaOCl.

AIM: To evaluate ex vivo the effects of combined and single use of EDTA, RC-Prep and NaOCl on the surface free energy of canal wall dentine using the captive bubble technique. METHODOLOGY: Eighteen extracted human pre-molar teeth were sectioned at the crown and the apical third, the remaining mid-root portion were bisected longitudinally. Thereafter, the root halves were embedded in resin blocks that exposed the dentine surface of the canal wall. The specimens were randomly assigned to six experimental groups (n = 6) after polishing. The root dentine surfaces of the first two groups were treated with 17% EDTA or RC-Prep followed by 2.5% NaOCl irrigation. Groups 3, 4 and 5 were treated with either 17% EDTA, RC-Prep or 2.5% NaOCl alone. Control specimens were irrigated with saline solution. The surface free energies of experimental groups were calculated by measuring air and octane contact angles on the canal wall dentine. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U and Bonferroni post-tests at P = 0.05. RESULTS: Compared with the control group; combined and single use of EDTA, RC-Prep and NaOCl irrigation significantly decreased the surface free energy of canal wall dentine surfaces (P < 0.05). Among all groups tested, the use of NaOCl as a final flush following RC-Prep treatment yielded increased wettability. Nevertheless, this value remained lower than that of the control group. CONCLUSION: Use of chelating agents alone or in combination with NaOCl decreased the wettability of root canal wall dentine.

Bicuspid↗

PubMed2007

The penetration of RealSeal primer and Tubliseal into root canal dentinal tubules: a confocal microscopic study.

AIM: To compare penetration depth into dentinal tubules of RealSeal with that of a well-established endodontic sealer (Tubliseal) by means of confocal microscopy. METHODOLOGY: Twenty sound extracted, single-rooted premolars were selected. Following completion of root canal instrumentation, the teeth were divided into two groups using a stratified sampling method, ranking teeth according to size. In group 1, 10 teeth were filled with Gutta-percha and Tubliseal using cold lateral condensation. In group 2, 10 teeth were filled with RealSeal. Both sealers were labelled with Rhodamine B dye. The teeth were sectioned parallel to their long axis resulting in 20 specimens per group. Confocal microscopy was used to assess the penetration depths of the sealers at three sites for each specimen (coronal, middle and apical). Data were analysed statistically using Stata Release 9.1. RESULTS: The penetration depth of RealSeal in each one of the thirds of the root canal was found to be higher than that of Tubliseal (P < 0.05). The penetration depths of the two sealers was found to be significantly different (P = 0.001). The mean penetration value for the RealSeal group was 908.8 microm whereas the mean value for the Tubliseal group was 139.5 microm. CONCLUSIONS: The penetration depth of RealSeal into the root dentinal tubules is significantly greater than that of Tubliseal.

Bicuspid↗

PubMed2007

Maxillary canine--first premolar transposition.

Tooth transpositions present at a relatively low incidence in the world population and primarily affect maxillary canines and premolars. Treatment of this disturbance should take into account aspects such as facial pattern, age, malocclusion, tooth-size discrepancy, stage of eruption, and magnitude of the transposition. Mechanics for correction should be entirely individualized, reducing the risks and adverse effects. Practitioners often select simpler options, indicating extraction of permanent teeth, which is an irreversible procedure that may bring about damages to the patient. This study presents a case report and treatment of unilateral transposition of maxillary canine and premolar with repositioning of affected teeth to their respective normal positions.

Bicuspid↗