Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
Comparative Study of Shear Bond Strength between Conventional and Flowable Orthodontic Adhesives /
المؤلف
Khalil, Tasneem Ahmed Almohamady.
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / تسنيم احمد المحمدي خليل
مشرف / صفاء مختار جاب الله
مناقش / نهلة السيد جمعة
مناقش / صفاء علي غباشي
الموضوع
Orthodontics. Orthodontic.
تاريخ النشر
2016.
عدد الصفحات
p 94. :
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
ماجستير
التخصص
Orthodontics
تاريخ الإجازة
18/6/2017
مكان الإجازة
جامعة طنطا - كلية الاسنان - Orthodontic
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 127

from 127

Abstract

The main requisite of orthodontic adhesive is to produce a strong and
durable bond to withstand both occlusal and orthodontic forces during the
course of treatment but at the same time permit bracket removal at the end of
the treatment without enamel damage and ease of cleaning. Among the
composite resins that could be used in orthodontics as bonding agents today,
flowable composite merits great attention because of its clinical handling
characteristics such as nonstickness and fluid injectability. However, there
are still few studies available that evaluate the bonding properties of these
materials with contradictory reports on the shear bond strength.
According to the manufacturer, a highly filled flowable composite
(Voco Grandio Flow) provide a low viscosity and can be used for bonding
orthodontic brackets without the use of a preliminary liquid resin on the
etched enamel surface. The objective of this study was to test the
compatibility of Grandio Flow for bonding orthodontic bracket without
liquid resin. The SBS values and the mode of bond failure were evaluated in
comparison with a conventional bonding adhesive (3M Transbond XT).
After storage of the collected sixty teeth in artificial saliva in 37°C for
a maximum 6 months after extraction which was changed every two weeks,
the teeth were divided into 2 groups according to the adhesive material used
TXT and GF and 2 subgroups according to using primer or not as the
follows: subgroup 1A: TXT with primer, subgroup 1B: TXT without primer,
subgroup 2A: GF with primer and subgroup 2B: GF without primer. In
addition to twenty eight samples were added and bonded by the same way to
evaluate the microleakage.