IADR Abstract Archives
Bond Failure Rate of Reconditioned Orthodontic Bracket
Objectives: To evaluate the Bond Failure Rate of new and reconditioned stainless steel orthodontic brackets; in-vivo.
Methods: A total of 30 patients with specific criteria were selected from the waiting list of orthodontic clinic of Faculty of Dentistry-UITM. The patients were randomly divided into three main groups of ten patients each. Thirty sets of 3M Unitek™ Gemini Brackets were used consisting of 20 brackets of each set. First and second groups were reconditioned using 50μm aluminum oxide particle powder for sandblasting and Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser respectively before bonding. The last was a control group. After polymerization, NiTi .014 archwire was inserted within half an hour. Monthly follow up of all the patients were done during six months. Bond failure rate was recorded and calculated by percentage of failure. The results were subjected to statistical analysis to identify differences in bond failure rate. ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to identify the difference. The level of significance was established at p < 0.05.
Results: It was found that 9% of the total number of brackets failed in the new group followed by 9.6% in sandblasting group and 10.9% in Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser group. There was no significant difference between the percentage of bond failure rate of the new brackets and both reconditioned groups (p =0.08).
Conclusions: Reconditioned orthodontic brackets using sandblasting and Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser method can be used as an alternative to new brackets following bond failure in a suitable cases.
Methods: A total of 30 patients with specific criteria were selected from the waiting list of orthodontic clinic of Faculty of Dentistry-UITM. The patients were randomly divided into three main groups of ten patients each. Thirty sets of 3M Unitek™ Gemini Brackets were used consisting of 20 brackets of each set. First and second groups were reconditioned using 50μm aluminum oxide particle powder for sandblasting and Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser respectively before bonding. The last was a control group. After polymerization, NiTi .014 archwire was inserted within half an hour. Monthly follow up of all the patients were done during six months. Bond failure rate was recorded and calculated by percentage of failure. The results were subjected to statistical analysis to identify differences in bond failure rate. ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to identify the difference. The level of significance was established at p < 0.05.
Results: It was found that 9% of the total number of brackets failed in the new group followed by 9.6% in sandblasting group and 10.9% in Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser group. There was no significant difference between the percentage of bond failure rate of the new brackets and both reconditioned groups (p =0.08).
Conclusions: Reconditioned orthodontic brackets using sandblasting and Er,Cr3+:YSGG laser method can be used as an alternative to new brackets following bond failure in a suitable cases.