
Relevance . Today, the dental market offers a large selection of adhesive systems developed based on various concepts. Improving adhesive technology in orthodontic practice is aimed at simplifying methods of use, improving the composition and ability of adhesion of orthodontic elements to the tooth structure. The aim of this study is to compare the shear bonding strength of different generations of adhesive systems for metal brackets placement. Materials and Methods . The study sample consisted of 40 recently extracted human upper premolars. The premolars were divided into four groups 10 each. The first group used the bond Transbond XT 3M Unitek (USA), the second - Beauty Ortho Bond (Japan), the third - Tetric N bond Universal (Vivapen) (USA) with acid etching with phosphoric acid (LI), the fourth - Tetric N bond Universal (Vivapen) (USA) without acid etching with phosphoric acid. The study used metal brackets for upper premolars (Gemini Bracket MBT, 3M Unitek, USA) with a micro-patterned base, the area of which was defined as 10.61 mm2. Mechanical shear strength tests were carried out using the Instron Universal Test machine (USA). One-way analysis of variance and the TUKEY test were used to examine significant differences in adhesive strength and shear strength between study groups. Results and Discussion. The highest adhesive shear strength was established when using the Transbond XT adhesive system (12.28 MPa) and the Tetric N Bond Universal system using the total etching (12.66 MPa) and self-etching (11.44 MPa) techniques; statistically significant differences between these adhesives were not detected. The second group of Beauty Ortho Bond (5.34 MPa) demonstrated the lowest adhesion force among the studied adhesives, with a statistically significant difference from the other groups. Conclusion : This study concluded that there are no notable differences in the comparison of the universal system with or without etching with the Transbond system. Regarding the use of the beauty Ortho bond, it obtained the lowest strength with significant difference from the remaining groups.
фиксация брекетов, orthodontic adhesive, adhesive bond strength, R, Self-etching adhesive, 610, adhesive system, self-etching adhesive, enamel etching, адгезионная прочность, протравливание эмали, адгезивная система, ортодонтический адгезив, 617, Medicine, самопротравливающий адгезив, bracket placement, Orthodontic adhesive
фиксация брекетов, orthodontic adhesive, adhesive bond strength, R, Self-etching adhesive, 610, adhesive system, self-etching adhesive, enamel etching, адгезионная прочность, протравливание эмали, адгезивная система, ортодонтический адгезив, 617, Medicine, самопротравливающий адгезив, bracket placement, Orthodontic adhesive
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
