Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
UNLABELLED: This study investigated the effect of a modified photoactivation protocol using two simultaneous light-curing units on the shear bond strength (SBS) of brackets to enamel. Metal brackets were bonded to bovine incisors using the resin-based orthodontic cement Transbond XT (3M Unitek). Four photoactivation protocols of the orthodontic cement were tested (n = 15): CONTROL: photoactivation for 10 s on each proximal face of the bracket at a time; Simultaneous: photoactivation for 10 s on both proximal faces of the bracket at the same time; One side-20s: photoactivation for 20 s at one proximal face of the bracket only; and One side-10s: photoactivation for 10 s only at one proximal face of the bracket. SBS was tested immediately or after 1000 thermal cycles. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) was classified. Data were subjected to two-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls' test (α = 0.05). Pooled means ± standard deviations for SBS to enamel (MPa) were: 10.2 ± 4.2 (CONTROL), 9.7 ± 4.5 (Simultaneous), 5.6 ± 3.1 (One side-20s), and 4.6 ± 1.9 (One side-10s). Pooled SBS data for immediate and thermal cycled groups were 6.3 ± 2.6 and 8.8 ± 5.2. A predominance of ARI scores 1-2 and 0-1 was observed for the immediate and thermally cycled groups, respectively. In conclusion, simultaneous photoactivation of the orthodontic cement using two light-curing units, one positioned at each proximal face of the bracket, yielded similar bonding ability compared to the conventional light-curing method. Photoactivation of the orthodontic cement at one proximal face of the bracket only is not recommended, irrespective of the light-curing time used.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oliveira et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: