doctoralThesis
Efeito de diferentes protocolos de colagem de bráquetes cerâmicos com LED de alta potência
Fecha
2021-04-26Registro en:
CRUZ, Itanielly Dantas Silveira. Efeito de diferentes protocolos de colagem de bráquetes cerâmicos com LED de alta potência. 2021. 67f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciências Odontológicas) - Centro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2021.
Autor
Cruz, Itanielly Dantas Silveira
Resumen
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of different photoactivation protocols on shear bond
strength (SBS) of ceramic brackets bonded to dental enamel, on bond failure through the
adhesive remnant index (ARI) and on the degree of conversion (DC) of a resin using the highpower photo activator Valo™ Cordless® (Ultradent) in Xtra power mode (3.200 mW/cm2).
METHODOLOGY: The brackets were bonded (Transbond XT®, 3M Unitek) on 80 crowns of
bovine incisors, randomly distributed into two study groups (N=40): monocrystalline brackets
(Group 1) and polycrystalline brackets (Group 2). Each group was subdivided into 4 subgroups
(n=10) according to the photoactivation protocol used: 3 or 6 seconds in the center; 3s in the
mesial/3s in the distal; and 3s in the cervical/3s in the incisal. After storage for 4 months
(distilled water/37°C), the shear test (100KgF, 1mm/min) was performed. For DC analysis, 80
resin discs were made with the same photoactivation protocols used in bonding brackets. The
SBS (MPa) was evaluated descriptively, using Student's T test, ANOVA one- and two-way and
by Tukey's post-test. The DC (%) was assessed descriptively, by ANOVA two-way and by
Tukey's post-test. Union failures were classified according to the ARI, analyzed descriptively
and by Kruskal-Wallis' test. RESULTS: Regarding the SBS, all protocols in Group 2 and only
the photoactivation on the center for 3 seconds of Group 1 presented clinically accepted values;
the values were significantly affected (p<0.01) by the type of bracket; and when comparing the
corresponding intergroup averages, p=0.003 was observed between the protocols of 6s in the
center and p=0.010 between the protocols of 3s in the cervical/3s in the incisal. In the DC
evaluation, the values were significantly affected by the photoactivation protocol (p=0.002) and
by the interaction between the factors (type of bracket*photoactivation protocol; p=0.033). ARI
scores 4 (39.4%; p>0.05) and 3 (72.5%; p=0.001) were predominant in Groups 1 and 2,
respectively. CONCLUSION: Caution should be exercised when bonding ceramic brackets
with Valo™ Cordless® in Xtra power mode, because high SBSs were observed. SBS and DC
might present statistically significant differences depending on the type of bracket and the
photoactivation protocol applied. In general, it is suggested to use the polycrystalline bracket
to the monocrystalline and apply 3 seconds of photoactivation in the center of the bracket.