Comparision of the Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets to Restorated Teeth by Methacrylate Based and Silorane Based Composite with Different Surface Treatment

Document Type : Original Article


1 Associated Professor of Orthodontics.Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentisty, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

2 Assistance Professor of Operative and Esthetic DentistryDepartment of Operative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

3 Postgraduate Student of Orthodontics.Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

4 Postgraduate Student of Restorative Dentistry. Department of Postgraduate Student of Restorative dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

5 Dental Student. Dental Student, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Avaz, Iran.


Background and Objective: This study compared shear bond strength of metal brackets to the teeth restored with silorane and methacrylate-based composites after different surface treatments.
Subjects and Methods:After cavity preparation on the buccal surfaces of 112 acrylic central teeth and etching; the specimens were restored with Filtek Z-250 (methacylate base) or Filtek P-90 (silorane base) composites. Surface treatments were done by the diamond bur+acid etch, diamond bur+acid etch+silane, air abrasion and air abrasion+silane. The brackets were bonded to the teeth and after thermal cycles; shear bond strength of the brackets to composites were calculated by the universal testing machine. Data were analyzed with one-sided ANOVA and Tukey test was used for paired comparison regarding surface treatments. Non parametric Kruscal-Wallis test was used for evaluation of ARI index.
Results: The mean shear bond strength of brackets to teeth restored with Filtek Z-250 after treatments of diamond bur+acid etch, diamond bur+acid etch+silane, air abrasion and air abrasion+silane were 16.36±5.32,13.11±4.08,12.74±5.21and 13.16±3.82 MPa respectively. The values for the Filtek P-90  were 11.7±3.54, 8.2±3.25, 10.41±2.25 and 10.56±3.04 MPa. In all treatment methods, adequate bond strengths created between the brackets and composite surfaces. On the Filtek P-90, bond strength for diamond bur+acid etch was significantly more than diamond bur+acid etch+silane (P<0.02).
Conclusion: Bond strength of the brackets to the silorane in relation to methacrylate was lower but acceptable. For this reason and due to lower remaining adhesive after debonding; the bonding of brackets to the teeth restored with silorane was acceptable in all methods.

1-Proffit W, Fields Jr H, Sarver D. Contemporary Orthodontics.5th ed. Philadelphia: St. Louis, Mosby; 2013. P. 17.
2-Jordan RE. Resin to resin bonding. In: Jordan RE. Esthetic composite bonding. 2nd ed. Mosby, St. Louis; 2007.P. 339-47.
3-Feilzer AJ, De Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res 1987Nov; 66(11): 1636-9.
4-Van Kerckhoven H, Lambrechts P. Unreacted methacrylate groups on the surfaces of composite resins. J Dent Res 1982Jan; 61(6): 791-5.
5-Boyer DB, Chan KC, Reinhardt JW. Build-up and repair of light-cured composites: bond strength. J Dent Res 1984Oct; 63(10): 1241-4.
6-Staxrud F, Dahl J. Role of bonding agents in the repair of composite resin restorations. Eur J Oral Sci 2011Aug;119(4): 316-22.
7-Costa T, Ferreira S, Klein-Junior C, Loguercio A, Reis A. Durability of surface treatments and intermediate agents used for repair of a polished composite. Oper Dent 2010Mar-Apr; 35(2): 231-7.
8-Burtscher P. Stability of radicals in cured composite materials. Dent Mater 1993Jan; 9(4): 218-21.
9-D’Alpino PH, Bechtold J, Santos PJ, Alonso RC, Di Hipolito V, Silikas N, "et al".  Methacrylate- and silorane-based composite restorations: Hardness, depth of cure and interfacial gap formation as a function of the energy dose. Dent Mater 2011 Nov; 27(11): 1162-9.
10-Wiegand A, Stawarczyk B, Buchalla W, Taubock TT, Ozcan M, Attin T. Repair of silorane composite-using the same substrate or a methacrylate-based composite. J Dent Mat 2012Mar; 28(3): e19-25.
11-Viwattanatipa N, Jermwiwatkul W, Chintavalakorn R, Kanchanavasita W. Weibull analysis of bond strength of orthodontic buccal tubes bonded to resin composite surface with various techniques. Orthodontic Waves 2010Jun; 69(2): 66-74.
12-Bayram M, Yeşilyurt C, Kuşgöz A, Ülker M, Nur M. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to aged resin composite surfaces: effect of surface conditioning. Eur J Orthod 2011Apr; 33(2):174–9.
13-Eslamian L, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Mousavi N, Ghasemi A. The effects of various surface treatments on the shear bond strengths of stainless steel brackets to artificially-aged composite restorations. AustOrthod J 2011May; 27(1): 28–32.
14-Bishara SE, Ajlouni R, Oonsombat C. Bonding orthodontic brackets to composite using different surface preparations and adhesive/primers: a comparative study. World J Orthod 2003; 4(4): 343-7.
15-Schmage P, Ibraham N, Herrmann W, Mutlu O. Influence of various surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of metal brackets to ceramic surfaces. AJODO 2003May; 123(5): 540-6.
16-Brunharo IH, Fernandes DJ, de Miranda MS. Artese FInfluence of surface treatment on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Dent Press J Orthod 2013 May-Jun; 18(3): 54-62.
17-Zimmerli B, Strub M, Jeger F, Stadler O, Lussi A. Composite materials: Composition, properties and clinical applications. Schweiz MonatsschrZahnmed 2010; 120(11): 972-9.
18-Chiba K, Hosoda H, Fusayama T. The addition of an adhesive composite resin to the same material: bond strength and clinical techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1989Jun; 61(6): 669–75.
19-Kao EC, Pryor HG, Johnston WM. Strength of composites repaired by laminating with dissimilar composites. J Prosthet Dent 1988Sep; 60(3): 328–33.
20-Germec D, Cakan U, Ozdemir FI, Arun T, Cakan M. Shear bond strength of brackets bonded to amalgam with different intermediate resins and adhesives. Eur J Orthod 2009Apr; 31(2): 207-12.
21-Reynolds IR. Letter: Composite filling materials as adhesives in orthodontics. Br Dent J 1975Feb; 138(3): 83.
23-Ribeiro AA, Morais AV, Brunetto DP, Ruellas AC, Araujo MT. Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontics brackets on composite resin restorations with different surface treatments. Dental Press J Orthod 2013 Jul-Aug; 18(4): 98-103.
24-Aw TC, Nicholls JI. Polymerization shrinkage of densely-filled resin composites. J Oper Dent 2001Sep-Oct; 26(5): 498-504.
25-O’Brien RD, Watts DC, Read MJF. Residual debris and bond strength- is there a relationship? Am J Orthod DentofacialOrthop 1988Sep; 94(3): 222-30.
26-Reynolds J. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod 1975; 11(2): 171-8.
27-Jost-Brinkmann PG, Drost C, Can S. In vitro study of the adhesive strengths of brackets on metals, ceramic and composite. Part 1: Bonding to precious metals and amalgam. J OrofacialOrthop 1996Apr; 57(2): 76–8.
28-Uysal T, Sari Z, Demir A. Are the flowable composites suitable for orthodontic bracket bonding? Angle Orthod 2004Oct; 74(5): 697-702.
29-Park SB, Son WS, Ko CC, Garcia‑Godoy F, Park MG, Kim HI, "et al". Influence of flowable resins on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Dent Mater J 2009Nov; 28(6): 730-4.
30-Ostertag AJ, Dhuru VB, Ferguson DJ, Meyer RA Jr. Shear, torsional and tensile bond strengths of ceramic brackets using three adhesive filler concentrations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991Sep; 100(3): 251-8.
31-Odegaard J, Segner D. Shear bond strength of metal brackets compared with a new ceramic bracket. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 1988Sep; 94(3): 201-6.
32-Buyuk SK, Cantekin K, Demirbuga S, Ozturk MA. Are the low-shrinking composites suitable for orthodontic bracket bonding? Eur J Dent 2013Jul-Sep; 7(3): 284-8.
33-Brauchli L, Steineck M, Ball J. Shear bond strength of a novel silorane adhesive to orthodontic brackets and unprepared bovine enamel. J Adhes Dent 2013 Feb; 15(1): 7-10.