Different Wire Surface Treatments on Adhesion Efficacy of Orthodontic Fixed Retainer: An In Vitro Study

This study assesses the impact of surface treatment with sandblasting and Z-primer on the adhesion efficacy of fixed lingual retainers. Dead soft stainless steel wire 0.016 × 0.022-inch ( = 120) was treated by different techniques and classified into four groups equally ( = 30) according to surface...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of contemporary dental practice 2024-07, Vol.25 (7), p.677-683
Hauptverfasser: Naji, Sarah M, Mohammad, Mohammad H, Enan, Enas T, Tawfik, Marwa A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study assesses the impact of surface treatment with sandblasting and Z-primer on the adhesion efficacy of fixed lingual retainers. Dead soft stainless steel wire 0.016 × 0.022-inch ( = 120) was treated by different techniques and classified into four groups equally ( = 30) according to surface treatment. Group I wire without treatment, group II wire treated with sandblasting, group III wire treated with Z-primer alone, and group IV wire treated with sandblasting with Z-primer. The stainless steel wire ( = 40) was bonded to 80 extracted premolars in pairs mounted in acrylic. Other stainless steel wires ( = 80) are embedded into acrylic blocks. All groups were divided into two subgroups according to thermocycling teeth samples were assessed by shear bond strength (SBS) A stereomicroscope was used to calculate the adhesive remnant index (ARI), while the acrylic block was by pull-out test. Finally, data were analyzed by IBM-SPSS (V 27, 2020). Mann-Whitney -test; Kruskal-Wallis -test and, two-way ANOVA were utilized to assess for SBS and pull-out. Kruskal-Wallis -test showed a non-significant difference in ARI between all groups, while in two-way mixed ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference in SBS between group III (sandblasting/Z-primer) vs group I and group IV Z-primer ( = 0.028) and control ( = 0.016), and a significant difference between group II sandblasting vs both group I and group IV Z-primer ( = 0.024) and control ( = 0.014). The two-way mixed ANOVA tests showed a significant difference in pull-out between sandblasting/Z-primer vs Z-primer ( = 0.012). Using of mixed surface treatment for fixed retainer as sandblasting with Z-primer is considered as the best method to increase adhesion efficacy between wire and composite and improve the quality of orthodontics fixation when compared with single treatment (sandblasting alone or Z prime). On the other hand, the sue of sandblasting alone for fixed retainer surface treatment is better than Z-primer alone but both treatments are better than fixed retainer without treatment. Developed and examined new and traditional techniques used to treat the surface of wire used as a retainer after orthodontics treatment to improve patients' treatment and life quality and decrease the chance of relapse. How to cite this article: Naji SM, Mohammad MH, Enan ET, et al. Different Wire Surface Treatments on Adhesion Efficacy of Orthodontic Fixed Retainer: An Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):677-683.
ISSN:1526-3711
1526-3711
DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3726