Shear Bond Strength, Bonding Time and Adhesive Remnant Index of Adhesive Precoated Flash Free Adhesive System vs Conventional Adhesive System using Metal Brackets: An In-vitro Study

Abstract

Introduction: With advances in materials for bonding in orthodontics, errors regarding amount of adhesive to be used can be controlled. Adhesive Precoated (APC™) Brackets were introduced to reduce the step of applying conventional adhesive on base of the bracket. Moreover, APC™ Flash Free Adhesive System (FFAS) eliminated the step of removal of excessive adhesive around the brackets. Aim: To compare Shear Bond Strength (SBS), Bonding Time (BT) and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) between Conventional Adhesive System (CAS) and APC™ FFAS using metal brackets Materials and Methods: This in-vitro study was carried out in the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics at Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. A total of 78 teeth with metal braces were split into two groups, with 39 samples each receiving treatment with the CAS and the APCTM FFAS. Shear bond forces were applied to each sample using a universal testing machine and recorded in Megapascals (MPa) to provide an indication of SBS. Both Groups’ BT was quantified in terms of seconds. The stereomicroscope indexes of Artun J and Bergland S were used to determine ARI. Microsoft Excel was used for data entry, while Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24.0 was used for analysis. The normality of the data was tested using two different t-tests. In terms of mean and standard deviation, descriptive statistics were represented. A significant level of 0.05 was used. Results: SBS values were 10.35±3.55 MPa and 11.23±3.82 MPa in CAS and FFAS respectively. No significant difference was found among the two groups (p≤0.29) in SBS. BT was significantly (p≤0.001) less in FFAS (95.54±8.72 seconds) compared to CAS (140.85±16.62 seconds). ARI was significantly (p≤0.002) less in FFAS (1.79±0.80) in comparison with CAS (1.23±0.74). Conclusion: FFAS brackets perform better in comparison to CAS in case of BT and ARI. Both groups show no significant difference in SBS.