Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 7285

Original article / research
Year : 2017 | Month : April | Volume : 11 | Issue : 4 | Page : ZC40 - ZC44

Comparative Evaluation of Two Bis-GMA Based Orthodontic Bonding Adhesives - A Randomized Clinical Trial

Christine Samantha, Shantha Sundari, Shyamala Chandrasekhar, Gautham Sivamurty, Saravana Dinesh

1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 4. Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 5. Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Christine Samantha,
No.15 (Old No. 7) Branson Garden Road, Kellys Chennai-600010, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: docsamantha@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Of the various orthodontic bonding materials, orthofix is a fairly new entrant into this field. This material was exclusively introduced for orthodontic bonding purposes; however, the application of this material for orthodontic purpose has not been scientifically evaluated so far.

Aim: The aim of the present study was to evaluate by an in-vivo double blinded split mouth rando mized clinical trial, the overall bond failure rates of two Bis-GMA based composite materials namely Transbond XT and Orthofix.

Materials and Methods: Thirty three participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated by lottery method into two groups. Group A participants had maxillary right and the mandibular left quadrants bonded using Orthofix and the remaining quadrants were bonded using Transbond XT. In Group B, the quadrants were reversed. Both groups were followed for a period of six months and were reviewed every 3-4 weeks. If a bond failed, the details were recorded and the duration of treatment before each breakage was calculated. Data were analyzed using Independent t-test and chi-square test. (p< 0.05) at 90% power.

Results: The overall bond failure rate for 263 brackets was 2.7% for Orthofix and 3.6% for Transbond XT. The mean esitmated survival time was 221.58 days for Transbond XT and for Orthofix was 220.07 days. The difference between these mean values were statistically insignificant (p>0.05). Similarly, failure rates of the anterior and posterior segment were compared and no difference was observed between the groups (p>0.05). The maxillary and mandibular teeth were compared and more failures were found in the mandibular teeth among both the groups but they were not statistically significant (p>0.05).

Conclusion: The overall bond failure rate and mean survival time for Transbond XT was similar to Orthofix with no statistically significant difference.

Keywords

Bond failure, Bond strength, Orthofix, Split mouth technique, Survival time

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/16716.9665

Date of Submission: Sep 10, 2015
Date of Peer Review: Oct 15, 2015
Date of Acceptance: Sep 26, 2016
Date of Publishing: Apr 01, 2017

Financial OR OTHER COMPETING INTERESTS: None.

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • PubMed Central® (PMC)New
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Chemical Abstracts Service
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCOhostNew
  • Embase & EMbiology
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Open J-Gate
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • SCOPUS
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com