RETENTION OF THE ORTHODONTIC
BANDS FOLLOWING SANDBLASTING
USING THREE DIFFERENT LUTING
CEMENTS –
A COMPARATIVE IN-VITRO STUDY

DR. PRIYA. K, MDS

© Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka

K. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences. . Bangalore.RETENTION OF THE ORTHODONTIC BANDS FOLLOWING SANDBLASTING USING THREE DIFFERENT LUTING CEMENTS – A COMPARATIVE IN-VITRO STUDY DR. PRIYA. MDS 2006. Karnataka.

Dept. professors. Sumit Bansal. I am extremely obliged to Mr. Dr. I sincerely thank Mr. and Dr. Kiran. MDS. Dr. Silju Matthew. Rishi Seth. Shrish. Dinesh Samuel Reddy. MDS. H. and Mr.B for their ever-read y help and assistance during my study. Dr. Sukhpreet Mangat.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am extremely t hankful to my renowned teachers D r . R. Reji George Professors. S. I am also grateful to Mr. Paul Gange. HAL Fou ndr y and Forge Department for providing me the testing facilities and excellent gu idance wit hout which t his study would not have been possible. MDS.G. MDS. Dr Mahendra. President. S and Dr. I thank them all sincer ely. Shaik Hyder Ali. Jaganath. Padmanabiah. Suresh. Dr. Ramesh Hegde. statisticia n for his immense help in statist ica l analysis for this study. My heartfelt thanks to Mr. Trimurthy and Mr. Maheen Ali Fathima. chief manager. Ramaiah Engineering College who helped me wit h the surface area of the bands.K MDS. Madhavan who helped me conduct the study. I am also thankful to Dr. Kyshap and Mr. Rajesh. I am thankful to Dr. Dutta. Mr. my dear friends and postgraduate colleagues. G a n es h P . Reddy. Dr. department of orthodont ics and dentofacial orthop edics. Sreenivasa Murthy. I am also grateful to Mr. Deepa. Dr. for allowing me to avail the facilit ies and his invaluable guida nce and encouragement during the course of my study. Dept. for their keen interest and their valuable suggest ions whenever sought for and their coop eration in the completion of t his stu dy. Ravi for helping me with the SEM facilities. My sincer e thanks to Mr. of Conservative Dentistry for providing their department facilit ies. of my department for their . Gunasheela. Dr. Reliance Orthodontic Products for being kind enough to send the material required for my stud y. I also thank Dr. I am also thankful to my postgraduate juniors Dr.N. Chetan Kumar. Anil Kumar Rai. M DS . I revere the suggestions and help offered to me b y my collea gu es Dr. of Oral Pathology and Dr. H. Department of M echanical engineering M. Principal. I sincerely thank Dr. Dr.

patience and sacrifice I wou ld not have reached this far. trust. Priya. Shashidhara. advice. Librarian and Mr. My sincere and heartfelt thanks to my beloved parents. K . constant inspiration. I offer my sincere prayers. Dr. Yeshwantraj Urs. I am thankful to my brothers and all my family members for their support and encouragement during all these years of my life. I also thank Mr.operation during my course. Assista nt lbrarian and other staff memb ers for their support during my entire course. it is the blessings of the Almighty and to him. without whose endless love.sincer e co. Above all.

31 INSTRUMENTS AND MATERIALS USED……………….36 ...58 .34 – 35 FIGURES……………….48 TABLES……………….67 EFFECT OF OTHER EXPLANATORY VARIABLES……………….54 ...2 -3 PLAN……………….CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED……………….4 – 7 Sections Tables Figures 4 5 6 -7 INTRODUCTION………………...8 – 11 OBJECTIVES……………….1 PLAN OF STUDY……………….31 SPECIMEN PREPARATION………………..71 ..62 ..67 ...49 – 53 GRAPHS……………….13 – 30 Dental Cements Orthodontic bands Sand Blasting 13 – 23 24 -26 27 – 30 SELECTION AND GROUPING OF TEETH………………..70 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………….32 .81 ..60 HYBRID CEMENTS………………..61 SETTING REACTION OF RMGIC………………..57 COMPOSITION AND SETTING REACTION OF GIC………………..12 DEFINITIONS………………..34 METHOD OF STATISIICAL ANALYSIS……………….63 SETTING REACTION OF PMCR………………..60 .63 .

.DR.1 . MDS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED ANOVA – Analys is Of Var iance ARI – Adhesive Remna nt Index EBA – Ethoxy Benzoic Acid GIC – Glass Ionomer C ement MP a – Mega Pascal PMCR – Polyacid Modified Composite R es in RMGIC – Resin-M odified Glass Ionomer C ement SEM – Scanning Electron Microscope SS – Stainless Steel ORTHODONTIC BANDS...... PRIYA K..

The teeth specimens were cemented with one RMGIC and one PMCR and the conventional GIC as t he control. unrestored human mandibular molars. which were freshly extracted b ecause of severe periodontal disease. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. T he teet h wer e mount ed in P VC sleeves and prefor med stainless steel orthodontic bands wer e selected for each sp ecimen. PRIYA K.. Results: The sandblasted bands showed statistically higher results than non sandb lasted bands..117 for non sandblasted bands and 1. (P<0.DR. The bond strengt h was tested after 24 hours using T IRA. The teet h were randomly divided into 3 groups. Among groups RMGIC had the highest mean value. were used for this investigation. Statistically.05)..860 for sandblasted bands. MDS PLAN OF THE STUDY Background and Objectives: T he purpose of this in vitro study was to explore and emp hasize the possibilities of increasing bond strength wit h newer hybrid cements and subsequently sandblasting the inner surface of the bands to deter mine if this procedure of increasing the surface area helps in enhancing bond strengt h. Among the groups.... Methods: Forty-five non-carious. The second part of the study involved measuring the force required to deband after the luting surface was sandblasted. Group B exhib ited higher retentive valu es. ANOVA test indicated that non-sandblasted bands had significantly less retent ion than sandblasted bands. T he bands wer e treated with aluminum oxide (50µ m) particles dir ected from the sandblaster under 60 psi of air pressure.2 . with a mean of 1. The force recorded during debanding was chosen from the stress-strain curve for each specimen and were measured in Newtons and fina l readings were tabulated in MPa..

.3 ... RMGIC... MDS Interpretation and co nclusio n: The RMGIC luting cement gives ever y indication of becoming t he material of choice for cementation of crowns. Prefor med Bands) ORTHODONTIC BANDS. In-office Sandblasting appears to be a convenient method to increase the retention of loose bands. PMCR.. PRIYA K.. Key words: (In-office Sandb lasting. space maintainers and orthodontic bands.DR.

DR. MDS PLAN sections Page No. 1. INTRODUCTION 1-3 2. SUMMARY & CONCLUSION 68-70 8. PRIYA K. METHODOLOGY 31-48 5.. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 13-30 4.. AIMS & OBJECTIVES 4-12 3. RESULTS 49-57 6 DISCUSSION 58-67 7.. BIBLIOGRAPHY 71-81 ORTHODONTIC BANDS.4 .....

DR. also among differ ent luting cements. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. III Comparison of the mea n valu es of bond strengt h between 52 non-sandb lasted bands and sandblasted bands.. Title Page no I Retentive bond strengt h valu es obtained from the study in 49 MPa II Comparison of mean values of bond strengt h b etween 50 non-sandb lasted and sandb lasted bands. V Comparison of the mea n valu es of bond strengt h a mong different luting cements in the Sandb lasted method...5 53 .. IV Comparison of the mea n valu es of bond strengt h a mong 52 different luting cements in the Non Sandblasted met ho d.. PRIYA K.. MDS tables Table No.

Non sandblasted band under SEM 48 ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Mounted Specimens – Group B 42 14... Specimen before debanding 44 16. MDS figures Figure No.. Scanning Electron Microscope 38 6. Group B – Resin Modified GIC 41 11. Procedure of sandblasting 46 20.. Group A – Conventional GIC 40 10. Teeth specimens after debanding 45 19. Mounted Specimens – Group C 43 15. TIR A 38 5. Incubator 37 4. being parallel to the analyzing rod of the surveyor 8.. Armamentarium 36 2. Non sandblasted band 47 21. Title Page no 1. Mounting of the tooth specimen 39 7.. Ultrasonic Cleaner 36 3. Specimen after debanding 44 17. Tooth held in the same position with PVC in 40 place. Mounted Specimens – Group A 42 13. Enlarged view of the lingual surface of the 39 tooth. Bands placed in bottles after debanding 45 18. Group C – Compomer 41 12. PRIYA K.. Sandblasted band 47 22.6 .DR. 9.

Minimum and maximum bond strength values 54 between groups using group A bonding agent 26... Distribution of values of bond strength among 55 Group B 27.. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS – INVITRO STUDY 23. Comparison of mean values of bond strength between the two methods ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Minimum and maximum bond strength values 56 between groups using group C bonding agent 30. Minimum and maximum bond strength values 55 between groups using group B bonding agent 28. Sandblasted band under SEM 48 24. Distribution of values of bond strength among 56 Group C 29.... PRIYA K.7 57 . Distribution of values of bond strength among 54 Group A 25..DR.

t he co nvent iona l band st ill plays an import ant role in fixed appliance t herapy.9 ORTHODONTIC BANDS. so lu bilit y o f t he current ly used dent al cement s in oral fluids and poor oral hygiene all cont r ibut e to t he init iat ion o f decalcificat ion.. zinc po lyacr ylat e cement .7. Alt hough bonding o f ort hodont ic t ubes t o t he t eet h is receiving much current int erest in t he for m o f indirect bonding. MDS INTRODUCTION Ort hodont ic band has been in clinical use for mo re t han 100 years. t he vast majo r it y o f buccal att achment s are st ill being cement ed using st ainless st eel bands and co nvent io nal cement s.2. zinc oxide eugeno l.. Gutt a percha. zinc silicophosphat e and black copper cement have all been invest igat ed. PRIYA K..1.2 By t he presence o f fixed appliance t he efficiency o f ho me pro phylact ic procedure is great ly reduced and t here is a need for prot ect ion o f adjacent enamel sur face.. zinc po lycar boxylat e cement . 3 Inadequat e bonding st rengt h o f dent al cement . More recent ly att ent ion has been focused on glass io no mer cement (GIC). 1. but a co mmo n problem to all ort hodont ist s. Whit e spot formatio n or enamel decalcificat ion can occur whenever bact erial plaque is ret ained on enamel sur face for a prolonged per iod.8 The ret ent ion of ort hodont ic bands to t he toot h surface is import ant to ensure fixed appliance t herapy. consider ing t he force levels in t he post erior regio n. seal break down.DR. Enamel demineralizat ion under ort hodont ic bands is a ser ious.. resin based cement s. In spit e o f t he wide spread use o f direct bonded bracket s and t ubes in clinical ort hodont ics.. 4-6 Several st udies in t he past have invest igat ed t he chemical co mpo sit io n o f var ious cement s.. t heir phys ical and chemical propert ies and t heir app licat ion as well as use in restorat ive dent ist ry.8 . Numerous agent s have been used to ret ain ort hodont ic bands.

3 It was shown t hat GIC released fluor ide fro m t he set cement . PRIYA K.. Washbon int roduced a mo lar band design t hat has remained t he indust r y st andard. Ret ent io n of t he co nvent ional ort hodont ic bands is t hrough mechanical means via it s close adapt at ion to t he toot h surface assist ed by t he lut ing act ion o f t he cement ..12 and t he cement remaining on t he toot h surface. MDS Zinc phosphat e cement and glass io no mer cement have been more ext ensively t est ed bot h in laboratory and clinical t rials..16 The advent of acid et ching17 has confined t he use of bands mainly t o t he t eet h in t he post erior regions o f t he dent al arches. Experiment ally it has been demo nst rat ed t hat GIC chemically adheres to t he toot h enamel.11 In vit ro invest igat ions have shown t hat GIC have great er ret ent ive capacit y t han ot her cement s and t his has been support ed by a reduced failure rat e in vivo. it warrant ed ORTHODONTIC BANDS. A review o f lit erat ure however reveals t hat t he mo st frequent sit e of failure is at t he band-cement int erface9.9 . Ort hodont ist s have used t he for med bands for near ly half a cent ur y... Ear ly st ainless st eel bands were anatomically crude and d iffic ult to adapt to t he t eet h wit hout creat ing cement lines. Their po pular it y grew as manufact urers developed. dent in as well as to st ainless st eel15 and t he laboratory t est s on ort hodont ic bands cement ed wit h t his mat eria l showed t hat t hey had improved ret ent io n relat ive to t heir predecessors. The fluoride can be elut ed as a simp le io n or as a complex such as fluoro phosphat e and is considered to be of clinical benefit s.10. Hence.. Wilson and Kent 14 int roduced glass io nomer cement .12..DR. In t he lat e 1960s. This pr inciple remains valid today in sp it e o f development s t hat have t aken place wit h regard to bot h dent al cement s and ort hodont ic bands. improved chro me allo ys t hat allowed bett er adapt at ion.13 In 1972.

It uses a high-speed st ream o f aluminum o xide part icles propelled by co mpressed air.. t hereby increasing t he sur face area and providing a pot ential for a degree o f mechanical att achment . This t echnique o f air abrasio n or sand blast ing was int roduced in 1950’s..DR. but also remo ves cont aminant s and t hins t he st ainless st eel oxide layer leaving a more fir mly att ached layer for bonding. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. more recent market ing includes it s app licat ion to ort hodont ics to roughen t he int ernal sur face o f t he bands and bracket bases. 18-20 Alt hough in it ially reint roduced as a met hod to roughen the sur face of any dent al mat er ials before cement at ion. Increasing t he bond st rengt h at t his int er face should reduce t he r isk o f band lo osening dur ing t reat ment . It not only increases t he ret ent ive area o f t he band lut ing sur face.... Sand blast ing o f t he met al sur face improves ret ent ion by roughening.10 . MDS add it ional invest igat ion on t he met hods to enhance bond st rengt h at t he met al-cement int er face to improve ret ent io n.. PRIYA K. it is ro ut inely used in cast met al rest o rat ion to enhance t he bond st rengt h. Recent research has focused on t he t reat ment of met als to increase t he ret ent ive area of t he bands and improve chemical and mechanical bonding.. Several met hods have been descr ibed one such st udy was w it h elect ron micrographs o f t he met al sur face roughened wit h d iamo nd bur or green stone has shown t o provide less micro mechanical ret ent ion when co mpared to sandblast ing.

The unplanned debanding is a co mmo n occurrence amo ng t he pat ient s. but a basic problem confro nt ing t he clinicians is band fa ilure.DR. of all t he rout ine operat ions. t his in vit ro st udy is under t aken to explore and emphasize t he po ssibilit ies o f increasing bond st rengt h wit h newer hybr id cement s and su bsequent ly sand blast ing t he inner sur face o f t he bands to det ermine if t his procedure of increasing t he sur face area he lps in enhancing bond st rengt h. which also aids in add it io nal ret ent ion by increasing t he surface area. MDS A sur vey o f lit erat ure unraveled a large number of co nt ribut io ns on t he subject of cement s and cement ing procedures in t he field of ort hodont ics. Loose bands t end to while away significant amount of clinical t ime. t he use o f bands st ill prevails which is pr incipally confined to t he posterior segment wherein t he mo lars play a pr ime ro le in serving as an anchor unit . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. PRIYA K. One such met hod of roughening t he lut ing sur face in order to secure t he bands in place is by sand blast ing...... which we as ort hodont ist s are called upon to perform. The pr inciple sit e o f band failure usually being t he band-cement int er face. Yet . Thus. One o f t he major. which is ver y frust rat ing to recement t he loose bands as it o ft en goes undet ect ed.11 . Despit e t he increased po pular it y o f bonded appliance in ort hodont ics. pro bably no ne is more fundament al or fraught wit h great er pot ent ialit ies t han t he seemingly simple act of cement at ion o f bands... Severa l met hods are emp lo yed to enhance ret ent ion o f bands by roughening t he inner sur face wit h d iamo nd or carbide burs or wit h green stone et c.

 To correlat e t he effect iveness of t his procedure of sandblast ing in a clinica l sit uat ion fo llowing t he use of a plain bands init ially..12 . ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. PRIYA K...  Effect of in-o ffice sandblast ing procedure on t he retent ion o f ort hodont ic bands using different cement s.  Compar ison o f t he bond st rengt h wit h t hree different lut ing cement s... MDS OB JECTIVES  To det ermine t he increase in bo nd st rengt h fo llowing sandblast ing.DR..

197326.13 . 11 Thus.. This aim is part ly de feat ed because o f t he appearance o f t he areas o f decalcificat ion and car ies on t he banded t eet h. in spit e of t he develo pment s in t he field o f cement s as well bands t his pr incip le is st ill valid. zinc po lyacr ylat e cement (RICH et al..21 Ret ent ion o f t he convent ional ort hodont ic bands is t hrough mechanical means via it s close adapt at ion to t he toot h surface assist ed by t he lut ing act ion o f t he cement . filling mat eria l. zinc oxide eugeno l (WILLIAMS et al. resin based cement s (LEE et al. Cement s set by acid. 1965)24. zinc po lycarboxylat e cement (RICH et al. PRIYA K. 1977)27 and red copper cement (RICH et al.. 1912)23. 1975)25 have all been invest igat ed. which ma y accompany ort hodont ic t reat ment .. 1975)25. Gibbon22 po int ed out t hat much unfavorable cr it icism was direct ed at ort hodont ic services by bot h t he lait y and t he pro fessio n and t hat many be lieved t hat excessive toot h dest ruct ion was t he penalt y paid for having “t eet h st raight ened”. liner.. 1975)25. zinc silicophosphat e (CLARK et al. One o f t he aims o f ort hodont ic t reat ment is to reduce t he incidence o f car ies by br inging malposed t eet h int o correct po sit io n. SADOWSK Y AND RETIEF. MDS DEFINITIONS – dental cements Dental cements are subst ances t hat harden t o act as a base. Numerous agent s have been used to ret ain o rt ho dont ic bands. Gutt a percha (LOWE YOUNG. ORTHODONTIC BANDS..base react ion.. or adhesive and prost heses to toot h struct ure or to each ot her. 1976)22.DR.

30. he demo nst rat ed t hat zinc phosphat e and silico phosphat e were similar in t heir abilit y t o ret ain ort hodont ic bands and t hat t he ret ent ive st rengt hs o f t hese t wo cement s were slig ht ly more t han twice t hat of t he EBA cement ... silico phosphat e.21 Zinc phosphat e cement was int roduced in 1878. liquid powder rat io and adhesive propert ies under var ying cond it io ns concluded. for removing bands cement ed to ext ract ed t eet h wit h different cement s namelyzinc phosphat e. 29 who st udied t he mechanical propert ies o f zinc phosphat e cement and had provided useful in fo rmat ion on t he mixing t echnique. and EBA reinfo rced zinc oxide eugeno l cement s. The possible har mful effect of zinc phosphat e cement on surface enamel was anot her aspect t hat has also been report ed. MDS Zinc phosphat e and silico phosphat e cement s.. The co mparat ive in vit ro t est by WILLIAMS et al (1965)24 had report ed t he fo rces required. A st udy by BERK SON (1950)28 invest igat ed t he adhesive propert ies o f zinc phosphat e cement and claimed t hat some adhesio n to enamel occurred. t hat t here was no difference whet her t he sur face was cleaned wit h alcohol or dist illed wat er and also st at ed t hat if t he powder was exposed to air for a long per iod gave a poor mix consist ency. According t o ADAMS (1955). t he che mical and p hysica l charact er ist ic o f which have been well document ed over a number of years and have lo ng been t he accept ed mat erials for cement ing o rt ho dont ic bands to t he t eet h...DR. PRIYA K..31 ORTHODONTIC BANDS.3 the cement soon became t he go ld st andard by which ot her cement s are co mpared because o f it s lo ng and well document ed history o f clinical use in band cement at ion..14 . Using solder reinforced bands.

According t o NORRIS et al. There were cert ain drawbacks inherent to t he use of zinc phosphat e cement . He has descr ibed carbo xylat e cement as t he first dent al cement . fluoride was added t o zinc phosphat e cement to reduce t he acid so lu bilit y and to impart ant icar iogenic propert ies to toot h enamel t o which st ainless st eel bands were cement ed. PRIYA K.. It was br itt le. of t he consist ency rout inely used in t he clinic is not of any import ance in t he development of decalcificat io n. However. He also noted t he po lyacr ylic acid mo lecules have t he abilit y to chemica lly bo nd to calcium io ns on t he calcified enamel t oot h surface as well as t o st ainless st eel.DR. had a relat ively high so lu bilit y in t he mout h. Researchers have developed ot her dent al cement s to overcome t hese drawbacks. and it did not adhere to toot h subst ance. Wit h t he development of po ly car boxylat e cement by Smit h in 1968. Also carboxylat e cement achieved a chemical bo nd w it h t oot h enamel and it was proven to be super ior to zinc phosphat e cement . WISTH JOHAN (1970)30 st udied t he effect of zinc phosphat e cement on t he enamel sur face and t he difference in t he rat e of demineralizat ion and he concluded t hat t he cement . MDS According t o NORRIS et al3 in t he 1960s.. Under cert ain co nd it io ns it prot ect s t he enamel fro m demineralizat io n. anot her group of cement s became available for cement ing ort hodont ic bands.... which does not solely rely upon irregu lar it ies o f t he ad jo ining sur faces for mechanical ret ent io n..15 ..3 one disadvant age of t his cement was short sett ing and working t imes t hat made t he cement at ion o f more t han t wo bands fro m a single mix ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Zinc phosphat e cement relied on mechanical int er locking for it s ret ent ive e ffect and on close physical adapt at ion for sealing restorat ion margins. but it did not provide any chemical bonding to toot h or metal sur faces.

. According t o M. t hey have shown t o have poor bond st rengt h and great er bond failure rat es t han co mposit e resins.DR. The st udy invest igat ed t he effect of var ying t he consist ency and cur ing time. as it made available. The development of t he orig inal glass io no mer cement by Wilson and Kent in 1972 was significant .32 True adhesio n to enamel and met al 15 probably occurs via io nic or polar mo lecular int eract ions. The drawbacks obser ved were d ifficu lt y in remo ving fro m t eet h and cast ing. It also compared t he chemistry o f dent al silicat es. PRIYA K. Mc Lean and Wilso n lat er developed it during t he 1970s.36 In an ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. Different fluo ride preparat ions had been added to polycar boxylat e cement to le nd ant icar iogenic propert ies and alt er t he mechanical propert ies. MDS difficult . In add it io n t he mixed cement s viscosit y could make band cement at ion d ifficu lt . A t hree. 35. which were good flow.34 glass io no mer o ffered several advant ages. This class o f mat erial has achieved wide spread use as a translucent mat er ial.16 . adhered t o dry gingiva and caused slight pain for 2-5min in unanaest het ized t eet h...H REISBICK (1981). lacked o pacit y.mo nt h st udy was conduct ed by CRISP and WILSON (1976)33 on t he chemist r y o f wat er erosion o f t he t wo for ms o f GIC t hat was made. for t he first t ime a restorat ive dent al mat er ial t hat had lo ng-t erm ad hesio n to toot h st ruct ure and also possessed car iost at ic propert ies due t o sust ained release o f fluor ide. Alt hough GIC has de mo nst rat ed high levels o f fluoride release. ample working t ime and t he cast ing seat ed readily.. if left for a lo ng per iod... The result was descr ibed in t er ms o f chemistr y and st ructure of t he cement . adherence t o t eet h. zinc polycar boxylat e wit h glass io no mer.

38 on t he physical propert ies o f dent al cement s t hat were commerc ially available.39 report ed t he effect of banding on t he localized lactobacilli count . term originally used by ANTONUCCI. combinat ion o f composit es and GIC had been developed. fluoride release fro m restorat ive mat er ials has been advocat ed as having t he abilit y to prevent secondary or cont act surface car ies... Glass io no mer and t heir mo dified fo r mu lat ions are t he main fluoride releasing mat er ials used today. MDS att empt to provide great er fluor ide release and obt ain adequat e bond st rengt h. A review by SAMUEL T. PRIYA K. The microorganisms were increased at t he gingival margins t hus increasing t he suscept ibilit y to car ies.. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Resin.. According t o t he st udy by CAMERON et al (1963). 37 In t he search o f ideal cement for lut ing purpose several co mparat ive st udies have been undert aken over t he last few years. 32 S ince t he int roduct ion o f s ilicat e cement s.17 .modified glass io no mer (RMGIC) are such co mbinat ions. consist ing of 2 component s. which increased fo llo wing banding and it ret urned to t he original level aft er t he bands were removed..32 Polyacid modified co mposit e resins (PMCR) or co mpo mer consist of similar co mbinat ions t hat behave pr imar ily like resins. SAK AMAK I and ARTHUR N. concluded t hat t he best physical propert y is possessed by silico phosphat e cement and t hose cement s wit h higher liquid powder rat io did not have bett er physical propert ies.DR.. BAHU (1969)..

Furt her MIZRAHI (1979)...DR. A reliable met hod to t est t he ret ent ion of cement s was invest igat ed by RICH et al (1975)25 and co mpared t he ret ent ive charact erist ics o f zinc phosphat e. polycarboxylat e and red copper cement . PRIYA K. The result also sust ained t he hypot hesis t hat t he cement layer could be penet rat ed by fluoride io ns. They conc luded t hat t he st rengt h required t o init ially fract ure t he cement bond ho lding t he bands. t hose relat ed to t he operator and t hose relat ed to the pat ient .. was used as a measure of ret ent ion and zinc phosphat e had t he highest ret ent ive value fo llowed by red copper and t hen po lycar boxylat e.31 who compared t he sealing abilit y o f zinc phosphat e and hydro phosphat e cement under band spaces. report ed t hat no difference exist ed bet ween t he t wo groups.. however.40 in a clinical st udy including t wo prospect ive groups and t wo ret rospect ive groups concluded t hat ret rospect ive groups cement ed wit h zinc phosphat e had more failure rat es t han prospect ive groups cement ed wit h ORTHODONTIC BANDS. which possibly act as a fluor ide depot and increased t he enamel resist ance to demineralizat ion..18 zinc . He concluded t hat t here was no difference in recement at ion rat es bet ween bo ys and gir ls. silico phosphat e and po lycarbo xylat e.. t wo major factors affect ed t he ret ent io n o f bands. MIZRAHI (1977)11 st at ed t hat. MDS According t o WISTH JOHAN (1972). A co mparat ive st udy by SADOWSK Y and RETIEF (1976)22 on so me cement s used in ort hodont ics inferred t hat composit e cement had great er ret ent ion t o enamel as we ll as to bands t han zinc phosphat e. Class II div 2 and Klo ehn cervical face bow t herapy had more rat es of recement at ion..

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

polycar boxylat e which could have been due to different t ypes o f bands, cement s, cement ing
procedures of different operators.
In anot her st udy MIZRAHI et al (1981), 41 report ed t he effect of toot h sur face
co nt aminat ion on band ret ent ion w it h different cement s. The result s showed t hat no
significant difference was seen wit h bands cement ed by eit her zinc phosphat e or silico
phosphat e on sur face co nt aminat ion. Wit h po lycarboxylat e t he ret ent ion decreased fo llowing
co nt aminat ion. They also concluded po lishing t eeth wit h pu mice pr ior to cement at ion did not
appear to benefit band ret ent ion.

On t he incidence o f whit e spot fo rmat io n aft er bonding and banding GORELICK
LEONARD et al (1982) 1 concluded t hat no significant difference occurred bet ween t he t wo
procedures.
Furt her MIZRAHI (1983)5 had st udied t he enamel o pacit ies fo llowing ort hodont ic
t reat ment . The st udy revealed, t here was st at ist ically significant increase in t he prevalence o f
enamel opacit ies on t he vest ibular and lingual sur face o f t he dent it ion. The increase was seen
great est at t he cervical and middle t hirds of t he crowns.
A co mpar ison st udied by EINAR K VAM and MEYER (1983), 42 bet ween zinc
phosphat e and GIC concluded t hat glass io no mer was a bett er lut ing medium in ort hodont ics.
A report by COPENHAVER (1986), 43 on co mpar ing zinc phosphat e and GIC for
it s abilit y t o inhibit decalc ificat io n st at ed t hat GIC had bett er abilit y t o inhibit decalcificat ion.

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........19

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

Ret ent ive bo nd st rengt h of t he ort hodont ic band cement s surveyed by NORRIS
STEPHEN et al (1986) 3 using zinc phosphat e, polycar boxylat e and GIC, inferred t hat bot h
poly carbo xylat e and GIC were as effect ive as orthodont ic lut ing cement as zinc phosphat e.
GIC was more favorable because o f t he prot ect ion against decalc ificat io n.
An updat e on GIC was provided by MIZRAHI (1988)12 in ort hodont ics t hat
det ermined t he failure rat es of t he bands cement ed wit h GIC. The failure rat e was muc h
lesser t han t hat recorded for polycarboxylat e.

Bond st rengt h o f light cure and chemical cure GIC for ort hodont ic bonding was
compared by COMPTON et al (1992).44 They concluded t hat light cure GIC was superior to
chemical cure dur ing t he first t went y- four hours and for bot h t he bond st rengt h increased
fro m t he first one to t went y four hours but light cure was t he more preferred mat er ial.
Mechanical propert ies o f light cure and chemical cure GIC as bonding agent were
compared by Mc CARTHY and HONDRUM (1994). 45 They concluded t hat light cure was
bett er t han self cure.
An invest igat io n by DURNING et al (1994)46

on cement s used to ret ain

ort hodont ic bands concluded t hat in vivo simu lat io n yields less in fo r mat ion and GIC was a
bett er alt ernat ive t han phosphat e; t he band ret ent ive abilit y o f bot h reduced wit h t ime.
Furt her, WRIGHT et al (1996)47 evaluat ed t he clinical per for mance of resinmodified GIC for bonding and also it s effect on cert ain microorganisms. T hey conc luded t hat
resin- mo dified GIC bonded bracket s effect ively, decreased t he proport ion o f t he S. mut ans
and Lacto bacilli when co mpared to resin adhesive.

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........20

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

MILLET et al (1998)48 compared dual cure compo mer and convent ional GIC fo r
band cement at ion and concluded t hat dual cure showed sig nificant ly higher bond st rengt h t
han convent ional GIC and t he failure was at t he enamel ce ment int erface for co mpo mer a nd
t he cement band int erface for convent ional GIC.
RMGIC was st udied under different surface co nd it io ns by ANNE BERESS et al
(1998). 49 They inferred t hat et ched enamel had t he highest st rengt h. No significant difference
was not iced in mo ist and dr y fields.
Anot her co mparat ive st udy by STEPHEN M.COHEN et al (1998),50 on t he bond
st rengt h of chemical cure and light cure resin- mo dified GIC concluded t hat t he et ched light
cure had t he highest bond st rengt h.
Compar ison o f t wo RMGIC to porcelain by CH UN- HIS CHUNG et al (1999)51
concluded t hat silane increased t he bo nding t o porcelain in bot h cases and t hat composit e as
well as resin- modified GIC had co mparable bond st rengt h.
The effect of t he enamel co nd it io ner on t he bond st rengt h of resin-reinforced GIC
evaluat ed by SAMIR BISHARA et al (2000)52 concluded t hat acid et ching wit h 37%
proved to be bett er t han 10% poly acr ylic acid.
Var ious ort hodont ic banding cement s have

been descr ibed by NICOLA

JOHNSON (2000).53
In a clinical ret rospect ive st udy by MILLET et al (2001)54 on t wo different band
cement s namely modified co mposit e and convent io nal GIC concluded t hat no significant

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........21

55 in t heir st udy on co mpar ison o f t he t ime of first fa ilure. The shear bond st rengt h to enamel was st udied by TOLEDANO et al (2003)57 using self and light cure GIC and a co mposit e as cont rol used for direct bonding..modified GIC. PRIYA K. They concluded t hat self cure had higher ORTHODONTIC BANDS. t he po sit io n o f band failure and t he change in whit e spot enamel lesio n dur ing fixed ort hodont ic t reat ment wit h modified composit e and convent ional GIC for band cement at ion fo und t hat t here was no significant difference in t he failure... MDS difference was not ed in t he t reat ment t ime and t he band failure w it h eit her o f t he t wo cement s. Furt her COUPS SMITH et al (2003)59 have assessed t he shear bond st rengt h o f resin-re inforced GIC.DR.mod ified GIC and polyacid modified co mposit e was st udied by DOUGLAS RIX et al (2001)56 and t hey demo nst rat ed t hat init ial fluoride release was more fro m po lyacid modified co mposit e and lat er it was fro m resin. According t o TJ Gillgrass et al (2001)... They also st at ed t hat resin-reinforced GIC could serve as an advant ageous alt ernat ive. However. The y inferred t hat resin modified GIC should be st rongly reco mmended as a mode of direct bonding.. bot h self and light cur ing.22 . Fluoride release by resin. YOSHITAK A K ITAYAMA et al (2003)58 measured t he t ensile st rengt h and t he shear bond st rengt h o f resin-reinforced GIC to porcelain and concluded t hat resin adhesive had higher bond st rengt h to porcelain t han resin-reinforced GIC. They not ed t hat t he band fa ilure was at t he enamel-cement int er face for modified co mposit e and band-cement int er face for convent ional GIC..

.DR. MDS st rengt h t han light cure under all enamel preparat ions.. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. A co mpar ison by K NOX et al (2004)61 on resin. PRIYA K... An in vivo st udy to det ermine t he effect of resin.mod ified GIC and po lyacid modified co mposit e inferred t hat resin. The failure was at t he band-cement int er face for GIC and for polyacid modified co mposit e it was at t he enamel-cement int erface. The st udy also st at ed t hat GIC had sufficient bond st rengt h to ret ain ort hodont ic bracket s and served as a reservo ir of fluor ide io ns...modified GIC on t he ename l demineralizat ion by RENATA CORREA PASCOTTO et al (2004)60 concluded t hat glass io no mer was a suit able alt ernat ive to adhesive for bracket placement ..23 .modified GIC had higher bond st rengt h.

DR.24 .. usually made o f a t hin st rip o f st ainless st eel t hat serves to secure ort hodont ic att achment s to a toot h”. POLLOCK (1923)64 described t he var ious st eps invo lved in fit t ing a band to t he mo lars or ancho r t eet h.. irid io p lat inum et c.66 a compar ison bet ween plain and cla mped bands demonst rat ed t hat plain band was as good as t he clamped one if well fabr icat ed and adapt ed to t he t eet h.... precious met als like go ld. regardless o f how beaut iful a piece o f jewelr y it may be”. If t hey are not st rong. PRIYA K.Orthodontic Band An O rthodontic Band is defined as “A r ing.. He also point s out t he var ious requirement s in choosing an idea l band mat erial. According to SHELDON FRIEL (1935). PULLEN (1921)63 descr ibed t he var ious qualit ies a band mat er ial should possess and co mment ed on t he direct met hods of mak ing mo lar bands. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. t hese bands are t he fo undat ion o f a fixed ort hodont ic appliance.62 The var ious mat er ials used for band const ruct ion are base mat erials like Ger ma n silver or Nickel silver. ALLAN BRODIE (1932)65 described t he t echnique of band pinching. durable and at t he same t ime well fitt ed an o rt ho do nt ic appliance cannot be efficient . He quot ed “Like unt o t he house built upon t he shift ing sands.. MDS DEFINITIONS .

.25 . The saving in t ime and effo rt to t he pro fessio n was enor mous. When bands were well fitt ed. prefo rmed st ainless st eel bands re ma in import ant for ort hodont ic t herapy. GEORGE V. PRIYA K..DR.. MDS HERBERT PASK OW (1950)67 described an easy way o f fabr icat ing t apered mo lar bands. NEWMAN (1974)69 comment ed that prefor med mo lar bands were so well adapt ed t hat t he fr ict ional forces alo ne could almost ret ain t hem on t he t eet h. In t he era of bonded ort hodont ic appliance.. 16 He also descr ibed a new band design. It made fit t ing o f difficult and inco mplet e ly erupt ed teet h easier and possible.. well placed and well cared for t hey made possible a high level of ort hodont ic achievement . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Bonded mo lar t ubes were st udied by MILLET (1999)70 who found t he mean survival rat e was 699 days and t hat t he gender and malocc lusio n had no significant role but t he age at t he st art of t he t reat ment and t he operator were determined to be useful predict ors of t he bonded mo lar t ube. According to SIDNEY BRANDT (1968)68 t he bands have cert ainly been improved over t he years... Preformed bands made t he pro fessio n aware of t he frequency o f mis mat ches in t oot h size. ear lier t han before. The preformed bands o ffered several advant ages as descr ibed by WARREN HAMULA et al (1996). The advent of t he prefor med band was a major st ep forward.

. appliance placement and t he philosophy o f light force toot h movement . to pinching pre for med st rips.. to having an invent ory o f preformed band s cont aining fully-shaped sizes has been an amazing ser ies of advances. ort hodont ics has reached a new plat eau.p lat inum or chro me allo y st raight .DR.. PRIYA K.. Wit h t he coupling o f prefor med bands. MDS The evo lut ion fro m pinching go ld ... ORTHODONTIC BANDS.26 . flat st rips t o fit toot h for m..

. PRIYA K.73 A st udy by ZACHRISSON AND BUYUK YILMK AZ (1993)74 on elect ron micrographs of t he met al sur face t hat has been roughened wit h d iamo nd bur or green stone demonst rat ed t hat t he apparent roughness was caused by per iodic r idges and grooves.. Early in 1943. More recent ly market ing includes it s app licat ion t o ort hodont ics to roughen t he int ernal sur face o f bands and bracket bases. The current focus is on t reat ment of t he met al to increase t he ret ent ive sur face area of t he band and enhance t he chemical and mechanical bo nding.12 and t he laboratory st udies support t his finding...20 Air abrasives were init ially used for modifying the sur face of enamel.19 In 1951 air abrasive inst rument was int roduced.. 18.3 According to HODGES et al (2001)72 increasing t he bond st rengt h at t his int er face would decrease t he risk o f band loosening dur ing treat ment .DR.Sandblasting Sandblasting is a procedure to clean or roughen a sur face by a iming a jet of sand at it .71 The most frequent sit e of band failure is at t he band-cement int er face9. The t echnique int roduced in t he 1950s... MDS DEFINITIONS .27 . 20 before cement at ion and t o enhance t he bond st rengt h. used a high-speed st ream of aluminum o xide part icles propelled by compressed air. dent in and restorat ive mat er ials. whic h ORTHODONTIC BANDS. DR. ROBERT BLACK 20 began his pio neer ing st udies using air abrasive t echno logy in dent ist r y.

ZERNIK (1996). Furt her WOOD et al (1996)75 co mpared t he bond st rengt h of zinc phosphat e.. Compar ison o f failed bracket s by SONIS L.76 compared t he effect of sand blast ing on t he bo nd st rengt h and concluded t hat sand blast ing increased t he bond st rengt h and... when co mbined wit h glass io no mer decreased t he failure rat e. ALI IHYA K ARAMAN (1997)77 concluded all t he met hods increased t he ret ent ion but micro -et ching provided ho mogenous microscopic undercut s. had t he same bond st rengt h as an unt reat ed new bracket. PRIYA K. Anot her st udy by STANLEY MILLER. zinc po lycar bo xylat e and GIC before and aft er sandblast ing and inferred t hat sandblast ing improved t he ret ent ion and t hat GIC was a bett er lut ing agent . ANDREW (1996)73 t reat ed wit h air abrasio n and t he unt reat ed bracket s inferred t hat t he fa iled air abraided bracket s.DR. The y ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. and a low speed micro motor wit h t ungst en carbide and green stone. Different met hods o f sur face roughening descr ibed by ENIS GURAY.28 .. They roughened t he maxillar y first premo lar bands by micro -et ching wit h alum inum oxide. Air abrasio n increased t he mechanica l ret ent ion... JOSEPH H. MDS provide lit t le micro mechanical ret ent ion and concluded t hat t he micro mechanical ret ent io n provided by sand blast ing was more advant ageous.

MANISH AGGARWAL et al (2000)81 compared t he shear peel st rengt h o f five different cement s using factory and in-o ffice mic ro-et ched bands and concluded t hat t here ORTHODONTIC BANDS. The ARI inde x indicat ed no cement was seen on t he toot h sur face aft er debonding wit h RMGIC. they inferred t hat air abrasio n increased t he bond st rengt h o f bot h cement s. half t he cement was on t he toot h. A co mpar ison by MENNEMEYER et al (1999)80 evaluat ed t he use o f hybr id io no mer.DR. The rebonding procedure was done using t he self cure s yst em and new bracket s. The resu lt s showed no significant difference in debonding force bet ween t he t wo convent ional adhesive. MDS concluded t hat t he t reat ed bands had sig nificant ly great er ret ent io n t han unt reat ed and no st at ist ically significant difference was found bet ween t he different met hods emp lo yed.. concluded t hat the best reco ndit ioning met hod fo llowing debonding appeared t o be removal o f t he residual co mposit e wit h t ungst en carbide bur and acid et ching t he enamel. resin cement s and GIC cont rol... Bond st rengt h st udied by MUI et al (1999).29 ... They also suggest ed micro et ching t he base to minimize t he amount of cement on t he toot h surface. 79 on t he bonded and rebonded ort hodont ic bracket base t reat ed wit h different co nd it io ning met hods also compar ing t he light cure and t he self-cure syst ems.. bonded to photo-et ched and st andard band mat eria ls t est ed in as received and air abraded co nd it io ns. For co mpo mer and co mposit e most of t he adhesive was on t he toot h aft er debonding.. PRIYA K. A st udy was conduct ed by MILLET et al (1999)78 using co mpo mer and resin modified GIC under laboratory co nd it io ns for bonding. wit h co nvent ional GIC. If t he bracket s were to be reused t hen t he base could be micro -et ched.

.. The st udy inferred t hat sandblast ing fo llowed by acid et ching had t he highest bond st rengt h and t hat sandblast ing alo ne proved to have lo w bond st rengt h and should not be advocat ed as enamel co nd it io ner.. There was low bo nd st rengt h wit h t he in pract ice-sand blast ing group. MDS was no difference bet ween RMGIC and PMCR and amo ng t he t wo RMGIC but st at ist ically significant difference was seen w it hin PMCR. Recent ly METE OZER and SELIM ARICI (2005)84 st udied clinical per formance of sandblast ed met al bracket s bonded wit h self cure RMGIC..83 They concluded t he ret ent ive st rengt h was lower for modified co mposit e fo llowed by convent ional GIC t ha n RMGIC wit h micro-et ched bands.30 . PRIYA K. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. They however concluded t hat no difference bet ween sandblast ed and non sandblast ed bracket wit h RMGIC aft er 20-mo nt h o bservat ion.. Anot her compar ison by HODGES et al (2001)72 on t reat ed and unt reat ed bands concluded t hat t he t reat ed bands had bett er ret ent ion. RMGIC and co nvent ional GIC was co mpared by MILLET et al (2003). The vert ical loading o f t he micro-et ched bands cement ed wit h modified co mposit e. However. CANAY et al (2000)82 co mpared acid et ching wit h air abrasio n for sur face preparat ion t echnique on enamel..DR.

. MULTI CURE)  PREFORMED ORTHODONTIC BANDS (3M Unit ek)  BUCCAL TUBES [NIBHA. The ext ract ed t eet h were stored in 10% for malin at room t emperat ure pr ior to use.9mm (0. were used for t his invest igat ion. 1. INDIA)  INSTRON MACHINE (TIRA 2820S. 2.036'') SS WIRE AND 0..five non-car ious.. which were freshly ext ract ed because o f severe per iodont al disease.9mm (0..3mm (0.C. TYPE I)  DUAL CURE COMPOMER (RELIANCE ORTHODONTIC PRODUCT)  RESIN-MODIFIED GIC (3M.V.020'' SS) WIRE (LEONE)  INCUBATOR (YORCO.31 . Dent sply) ORTHODONTIC BANDS. ALUMINA . MDS SELECTION AND GROUPING OF TEETH Fort y. INSTRUM ENTS AND M ATERIALS USED (Fig.DR. SLEEVES  AUTO POLYMERISING ACRYLIC RESIN  CONVENTIONAL GIC (FUJI. GERMANY)  ULTRASONIC TANK (Dent aurum)  SANDBLASTER (Bio-art . int ernal diamet er of 0. unrestored human mandibular mo lars.. Brasil...  ROUND.5mm (0.25'') ]  LINGUAL BUTTONS (NIBHA)  0. PRIYA K.3.4 and 5)  P.50 SIZE)  SEM (LEO 440 I)  WELDER (Dent aurum)  LIGHT CURE UNIT (Spect rum 800.036'') lengt h 6.

The lingual sur faces o f t he t eet h were kept parallel t o t he analyz ing rod of t he Ney’s surve yor and were mount ed (Fig. 7 and 8)... The t eet h were rando mly divided int o 3 groups of 15 specimens each t o t est t hree commercially available lut ing cement s.. » GROUP C– Dual cure Co mpo mer / Polyacid Modified Co mposit e Resin (PMCR) (Fig.. The convent ional cement was manipu lat ed on t he mixing pad as per t he manufact urers reco mmendat ions..9mm (0. The t eet h were t hen mo unt ed wit h auto-polymer izing acr ylic resin in custom.32 .18'') in lengt h and 25. Each band was seat ed on t he select ed t eet h wit h hand pressure and t he n ORTHODONTIC BANDS.11 and 14).V.fluor idat ed pro phylact ic past e for 1 minut e to remove any fo reign debr is.9 and 12). Root s wit h t he ret ent ive wire in place were fully encapsulat ed by t he resin.. Prefor med st ainless st eel ort hodont ic bands were select ed for each specimen and checked for size and fit on each mo lar.C sleeves of appro ximat ely 30mm (1.6mm (1. » GROUP B – Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) (Fig 10 and 13).. T he exposed crowns were c leaned wit h non. MDS SPECIM EN PREPARATION A per fo rat io n was made t hrough t he cent er of each t oot h near t he furcat ion area and a 0. PRIYA K. The buccal t ubes and lingual buttons were welded at 3.DR.5mm fro m t he occlusal sur face at 4 Amps wit h five spot welds. t hey were loaded int o t he ort hodont ic bands.036'') SS wire was placed in t he ho le to aid in t he ret ent ion of t he t eet h wit hin t he acr ylic.made P. 6. The t eeth spec imens were numbered and t he bands were placed in numbered bott les respect ively as t hey were t o be recement ed.00'') dia met er. » GROUP A – Co nvent ional Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) (Fig. Aft er mixing each cement .

for 40 seconds in case o f RMGIC and 20 seconds in case o f PMCR fro m t he occlusal aspect of t he band. T he ort hodont ic bands were att ached wit h 0. as direct ed by t he manufact urer.02'') per minut e.DR. The bands were cleaned in an ult rasonic cleaner for 20 minut es to remo ve any residual cement .33 . The mo unt ed t eet h were clamped to t he ho lding device w it h a large diamet er ho le allowing each mo lar crown t o protrude and sit direct ly below t he att achment apparat us o f TIRA. which was used t o calculat e t he bond st rengt h wit h t he band sur face area dat a.020 '') SS wire s ling.. t he specimens were stored in saline at 37º C and 100% hu mid it y for 24 hours in an incubat or. Aft er wait ing for t en minut es.. and final readings were t abulat ed in MPa. The bond st rengt h was t est ed aft er 24 hours using TIRA. This arrangement allowed all t he fo rces t o be direct ed parallel t o t he lo ng axis o f t he toot h during band remo val.15 and 16).5mm (0. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 17). The RMGIC and co mpo mer were t hen light cured wit h t he dent al cur ing light . Pet roleum jelly was applied around t he band per ipher y.. MDS wit h t he band seat er. Using TIRA in t he t ensile mode wit h t he crosshead speed o f 0.. t he loop of which engaged t he buccal t ube and t he lingual button of each ba nd (Fig. The excess cement was remo ved fro m t he occlusal and cer vical margins of t he bands w it h dr y cotton roll so t hat it would not int erfere wit h t he t est result s. Aft er debanding t he bands were placed int o t he respect ive numbered bott les (Fig.. The debanded t eet h were stored back in wat er and cleaned wit h scaler and pumice. PRIYA K. t he maximum force recorded during debanding was chosen fro m t he st ress-st rain curve for each specimen and was measured in Newtons..5mm (0..

. The bands were t reated wit h alu minum oxide (50µ m) part ic les direct ed fro m t he sandblast er under 60 psi o f air pressure at a dist ance of 10mm fro m t he band u nt il a unifo r m frost y appearance was visible (Fig. PRIYA K. MDS The second part of t he st udy invo lved measur ing t he force required t o deband aft er t he lut ing surface was sandblast ed. The result s were averaged ( mean + st andard deviat ion) for bond st rengt h bet ween t he met hods and t he lut ing agent s.34 ...5) st at ist ical package.. magnificat ion of 1000X. The sandblast ed band sur face was obser ved under a magnifying lens. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. 20 and 22) and one sandblast ed band (Fig.DR. The sandblast ed bands were recement ed to t heir respect ive t eet h. Any residua l sand was remo ved using t he air syr inge.19). Typically t his required 15-20 seconds. One non sandblast ed (Fig. The cement at ion was carr ied out according t o t he manufact urer’s reco mmendat io n as ment ioned above.. METHOD OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The dat a were co llect ed on for ms and ent ered into a Microso ft Excel Worksheet and analyzed using SPSS (ver 7. Two -way analys is o f var iance t est used to find a significant difference bet ween t wo means.. 21 and 23) was photographed under SEM at 25KV.

. MDS Analysi s of Variance: In t his st udy.. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. Tukey’s t est was t hen used to det ect significant difference bet ween group means..05 was accept ed as ind icat ing st at ist ica l significance. This exper iment al design is called a t wo -way analys is o f var iance. In above t est “p” value o f < 0. t here is a significant difference bet ween group means.35 .. PRIYA K.. If F value is significant . t wo independent var iables namely met hod and lut ing cement s were compared w it h respect to bond st rengt h..DR.

..36 .. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS. PRIYA K.DR.....

..DR. PRIYA K.. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS.....37 .

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........38

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........39

DR. PRIYA K, MDS

ORTHODONTIC BANDS........40

..41 .. PRIYA K.DR. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS.....

.DR.. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS. PRIYA K....42 ...

DR... MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. PRIYA K...43 ...

PRIYA K..DR. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS.44 .......

MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS.DR........ PRIYA K.45 .

..DR.. PRIYA K. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS..46 ....

. PRIYA K.47 ..DR. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS......

.... PRIYA K. MDS ORTHODONTIC BANDS..48 ...DR.

9721 0.1557 2.D.3331 1. 14.1714 1. 15.4129 1.6654 1. PRIYA K.1929 2. Bangalore.49 .9962 1.0110 0.3380 1.8464 1.9897 1.4202 1.2341 2.9409 0.8650 0.9123 0..6099 1.8791 The dat a fro m t he st udy was subject ed to ANOVA t est.5455 1.9224 0.9499 1.1348 2.8312 1.9076 0.4221 0.1251 0. 3.4424 1.4080 1..9501 2.2035 2.9454 1.3877 1.4406 1.1153 1.4456 1.7438 1.1827 2. MDS The st udy was conduct ed in t he Depart ment of Ort hodont ics and Dent ofacia l Ort hopedics.3067 1. 11.0672 2.4350 1. 1.0856 1.9352 1.4308 1..5820 1.1750 2.0678 1.Foundr y and Forge Depart ment .8662 0. 2.9762 1.9300 0.C.4916 1.4834 1.9314 1.1003 1..4746 1.9434 1.9781 1.4265 1.1353 2.9156 0. 4. 6.0360 1.4487 1. The shear bond st rengt h was t est ed on a universal t est ing machine.9082 1. (TIRA). 5. 12. M. 9.8714 1.1607 2. The values were recorded in Newton and convert ed int o MPa for st at ist ical analysis (Table I).1865 2.9544 0. Bangalore and HAL .0404 1.DR.5768 1.4617 1.8265 0.6567 1. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.2431 1.0180 0.1466 1.3599 1.S.9922 1.0373 1.2321 2. Table I: Retentive bond strength values obtained from the study in MPa Sl No..1869 2. The st udy was conduct ed to evaluat e t he effect of in-o ffice sand blast ing on t he ret ent ion o f ort hodont ic bands w it h t hree different lut ing cement s.8321 0.4490 1. The Mean values and St andard Deviat ions o f shear bond st rengt hs o f non sandblast ed and sandblast ed bands are present ed in Table II. 8.4909 1.. 13.0356 1.8918 1.9048 1.9970 1..R.9744 0.4150 1. 7. 10.9106 0. Group A Group A Group B Group B Group C Group C NonSandblast ed sandblast ed Nonsandblast ed Sandblast ed Nonsandblast ed Sandblast ed 1.

069 1. MDS Table II: Comparison of mean values of bond strength between nonsandblasted and sandblasted bands..935 0.950 2. Method Non Sandblasted Bands Sandblasted Bands Group N Mean Median Std Dev Minimum Maximum GROUP A 15 0.422 1..082 1. “ANOVA” test was used for ana lyzing t he significance bet ween t he ret ent ion of non sandblast ed and sandblast ed bands.915 1. 30) The Test revealed t hat t here was Significant Mean difference in bo nd st rengt h bet ween group A. PRIYA K. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.175 0.912 0.997 GROUP B 15 2.931 1. also among different luting ce ments. GROUP B & GROUP C Group Number o f observatio ns 90 The result s were st at ist ically analyzed.50 .234 GROUP C 1.061 1.907 0. B and C.046 0.518 1.413 0.744 1.058 1.974 GROUP B 15 1.149 2.171 GROUP A 15 1.. The result s o f analys is o f var iance in co mpar ison amo ng non sandblast ed and sandblast ed bands showed t hat t here was st at ist ically significant difference bet ween t he t wo met hods (Table III.077 1...037 0.827 0..066 0.491 0.665 15 Class Level Informatio n Class Levels Values 2 Non Sandblasted and Sandblasted Method Band 3 GROUP A. Fig..DR.243 1.389 1.462 GROUP C 15 1.

234 wit h mean of 2.149 (Table IV and V.058 for t he non sandblast ed group and for t he sandblast ed group minimum being 1.997 and a mean o f 1.. Range fro m a minimum o f 0. (P<0. Fig..0907 and for t he sandblast ed group minimum being 1. 26 and 27).422 and maximum o f 1..DR.827 to maximum o f 0.243 to maximum o f 1. Fig.24 and 25). Group B ANOVA t est indicat ed t hat non-sandblast ed bands had sig nificant ly less ret ent io n t han sandblast ed bands.IV and V..974 for t he no n sandblast ed group wit h a mean o f 0.915 (Table. (P<0.389 for t he no n sandblast ed group and for t he sandblast ed group minimum being 1.171 wit h a mean o f 1. (P<0.665 wit h mean of 1. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Group C ANOVA t est indicat ed t hat non-sandblast ed bands had sig nificant ly less ret ent io n t han sandblast ed bands.931to maximum o f 1.51 . MDS Group A ANOVA t est indicat ed t hat non-sandblast ed bands had sig nificant ly less ret ent io n t han sandblast ed bands.05).518 (Table IV and V...05).05). PRIYA K.462 and a mean o f 1.744 and maximum o f 1.950 and maximum o f 2. Range fro m a minimum o f 0. Fig. Range fro m a minimum o f 1.28 and 29)..

. PRIYA K.058 F value P value 269..860 F value P value 2707. Cement groups N Mean Group A (Red) Convent ional GIC Group B (Yello w) RMGIC Group C (Green) Compo mer 15 0.05 S ince t here was also st at ist ically significant value exist ing amo ng t he t hree groups.62 <0.52 .. Table IV: Co mparison of the mean values of bond strength among different luting ce ments in the Non Sandblasted method.05 ORTHODONTIC BANDS. MDS Table III: Co mparison of the mean values of bond strength between non sandblasted bands and sandblasted bands.. Tukey’s t est was perfor med.DR..117 Sandblast ed 45 1..16 <0.389 15 1..907 15 1. Methods N Mean Non-Sandblast ed 45 1.

. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.915 Group B 15 2. Cement groups N Mean Group A 15 1....53 .09 <0.149 Group C 15 1. t he sandblast ed bands showed st at ist ically higher result s t han non sandblast ed ones.05 Thus in co mpar iso n.518 F value P value 264. PRIYA K.... MDS Table V: Co mparison of the mean values of bond strength among different luting cements in the Sandblasted method.DR. Amo ng t he groups Group B exhibit ed higher ret ent ive values st at ist ically.

. 93 0.s a n d b la s t e d th o d 1. 8464 2 1. 8265 Observed Values 1. 8312 4 m e th o d 1.. 9156 0. 8918 S 1.. 8662 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 S 13 14 15 14 15 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 a m p le N u m b e r Fig.7438 1. 8321 0. 9048 N me 0. 9454 1. 9544 0. 25 : Minimum and Maximum Bond Strength values between Groups using Group A bonding agent 2.997 2 Bond Strength (MPa) 1. 9076 0. PRIYA K. 997 1.9744 1 0.5 0 Minimum Maximum Non-sandblasted method ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 865 1 0..5 0. 2 4 : D is t r i b u t io n o f V a l u e s o f B o n d s t r e n g th a m o n g G r o u p A . 9224 0. 7438 1.5 0. 9082 2 0 .5 1.54 Minimum Maximum Sandblasted method 12 13 . 8791 1.DR. 9106 0.8265 0. 9123 0. 9352 a n d b la s t e d 1. 9744 1 . MDS F ig . 9781 1. 9434 1. 9499 1.5 o n . 9897 5 1. 9721 0. 8714 0... 9409 0. 9762 1..

4129 1.1929 2.1607 Non-sandblasted method 2.9 5 0 1 1 .2 1 13 14 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 15 -0.2321 2.5 2 Bond Strength (M Pa) 2 1 .55 M in im u m M a x im u m S a n d b la s t e d m e t ho d 9 10 11 12 ..4 6 1 7 .7 1...4406 1.2 0. PRIYA K. 26: Distribution of Valu es of Bond strength among Group B 8 2.0672 2..3067 1.1348 2..3 Sa mple Nu mber F ig .3877 1.415 1.9501 2.338 1.4308 1. 2 7 : M i n i m u m a n d M a x i m u m B o n d S t r e n g t h p s u s in g G r o u p B b o n d in g a g en t v a lu e s b e tw e e n G ro u 2 .5 1 ..4617 1.2 3 4 1 1 .3599 1.2431 Observed Values 1.4202 1.449 1.1557 2.5 0 M in im u m N o n -s a n db la s te d M a x im u m m e th o d ORTHODONTIC BANDS.1869 2..7 1.DR.2 2.2 4 3 1 1 0 .7 0.1865 1.408 1.0404 7 2.3331 1.1827 Sandblasted method 2. MDS Fig.175 2.2035 2.1353 2.4265 1.2341 2.

5768 1.0356 0.4 0.4916 1.1 7 1 4 .8 1 ..6 1 1 .s a n d b l a s te d m e th o d ORTHODONTIC BANDS.4746 1.93 1 4 0 .2 0 M in im u m N M a x im u m M in i m u m o n ...6 6 5 4 1 . 2 9 : M i n i mu m a n d M a x i m u m B o n d S tr e n g th v a lu e s s u s in g G r o u p C b o n d in g a g ent b e tw e e n G ro u p 1 .582 Sandblasted method .4 2 2 1 .6099 1.2 1.4487 0..1466 1.9922 1.9962 1.6 1. MDS Fig.9314 1.6567 1.435 Non-sandblasted method 1.6654 1.4221 1.011 1..4909 1..8 0.6 0.1251 0.0856 3 1 1. 28: Distribution of Values of Bond strength among Group C 2 1.0678 1.. PRIYA K.1153 1.4834 1.56 M a x im u m S a n d b l a s te d m e t h o d 8 9 1.4424 1.8 0 .1714 1.4 0.5455 1.2 1 0 .8 1.6 0 .4456 1.DR.2 0 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sample Nu mber F i g .018 1.1003 4 1.036 1.4 Bond S treng th (MPa ) 1 1 .4 0 .0373 Observed Values 1.

000 1.915 1.000 0.500 1.518 1..907 0..058 1.500 Non-sandblasted m ethod Sandblasted method 2.389 1. 30: Comparision of M ean values of Bond strength b et ween two methods 2.000 Group A Group B ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. PRIYA K. 149 Mean Values of Bond Strength (Mpa) 2.... MDS Fig.DR.500 0..57 Group C .

Alu mino silicat e glass fused in t he presence of fluoride fluxes result ORTHODONTIC BANDS. t he t ype o f band mat erial.. which exist s eit her in dr ied for m or as hydrous so lut ion. Glass io no mer cement (GIC) has beco me a more attract ive alt ernat ive especially due to it s propert y o f fluor ide release.. Alt hough direct bond ing of fixed ort hodont ic appliance att achment . Space bet ween band and enamel are filled w it h cement .. Unlike a cast crown or inlay. dent in and most met als by emp lo ying var ious mixt ures of carbo xyl cont aining acids (po lyalkeno ic acids) react ing wit h alumino silicat e glass.. part icular ly around t he cervical margin. where t he band does not cont act t he enamel sur face. is a rout ine pract ice for ant er ior t eet h. mo lars are o ft en banded because t he failure rat es t end to be lower t han t hat of bonded attachment s.DR.. Zinc phosphat e was in wide spread use for mo lar band ce ment at io n u nt il 1980s but due to t he incidence o f increased so lu bilit y and enamel de mineralizat ion under loose bands.3 COMPOSITION AND SETTING REACTION OF GIC GI cement has t wo co mponent s: a powder calcium aluminum fluorosilicat e glass. band widt h.58 . PRIYA K. an ort hodont ic band is not in int imat e cont act wit h enamel. band po sit ion and cement ing procedures.70 Improved ret ent ion is mainly due to increase in sur face area of t he bands. Band ret ent ion is a co mplex p heno menon and may be influenced t o a var ying ext ent by t he fit of t he band. MDS Int egrit y o f an ort hodont ic appliance is essent ial to t he co nt inu it y o f t reat ment mechanics... It capit alizes on t he carboxyl chelat ion to enamel. and a carbo xylic acid copolymer. There are areas.

which are progressively replaced by io nic ones. as t he react ion proceeds. In t he first .DR. However. Sett ing process t akes place in t wo st eps:85 1. as well as aft er sett ing86 Add it io nal fluor ide is released when GIC is exposed to acids. MDS in an alkaline co mpo sit io n t hat releases fluor ide io ns when react ed wit h acids. t he calcium io ns (which may t ake t he for m o f fluoride co mple x io ns. GIC is more prone to early mo ist ure cont aminat ion and t akes 24 hours to reach maximum st rengt h. PRIYA K... The t erms “specific adhesio n” or a “phys ico-chemical adhesio n” is a more accurat e t erm.. 44 ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. It is almost cert ainly t he result of secondar y fo rces o f mo lecular att ract ion rat her t han pr imar y chemical bonds. Mixing process occurs in hydrous phase. which serves t o dist inguish t his t ype o f att achment fro m mechanical ad hesio n. Ad hesio n probably resu lt s fro m io nic or polar mo lecular int eract ions. a co mplet e int er lacing occurs by t he react io n o f aluminum io ns wit h t he carboxylic acid groups t hat have not yet react ed.15 The fluid past e wet s t he sur face and is att ached by hydrogen bo nds. cement and t he met al restorat ion reduces micro leakage patt erns arising fro m fau lt y ce ment margins.. Fluor ide release has been measured dur ing t he GIC sett ing react ion.. It was seen t hat a st rong polar bo nd bet ween t he toot h. This is so met imes called “chemica l adhesio n”. slower st ep. 2. CaF+) are incorporat ed bet ween t he polycarboxylic acid mo lecules. which relies on mechanical int er locking. rapid st ep. it is not ent irely correct.base react ion a po lysalt gel is for med in which t he glass part icles are embedded. In t he fo llo w ing.59 . In t his acid. Alt hough a chemical react io n may be invo lved in for ming t he adhesive bo nd. The fluoride co mplexes o f calc ium and aluminum react wit h carboxylic acid copolymer..

.92 HYBRID CEMENTS In an att empt to provide great er fluor ide release and obt ain adequat e bond st rengt h comparable to composit es.32 which set s by polymer izat ion of met hacr ylat e group (oft en light act ivat ed).modified glass io no mer cement s (RMGIC) are such co mbinat io n. co mbinat ion of GIC and co mposit e resin has bee n developed t o creat e “Hybr id cement s”. One reason is t he convergence o f t he t hree st rongest muscles o f mast icat io n – masset er..DR. decreases mo ist ure co nt aminat io n and increases rat e of st rengt h development . They have a diffusio n-based ad hesio n bet ween t he cement and toot h surface and co nt inuously release fluor ide.93 t he st rongest bonding is achieved when t he bond is “cohesive” t hat is. hence.. t hey self cure by acid. which allowed snap set .... MDS St ephen and Wilso n87. t emporalis and int er nal pt er ygo id in t he area of first mo lar and second bicuspid.89. PRIYA K. They are essent ially resin mat r ix co mposit es in which filler is replaced by io n leachable aluminosilicat e glass t hat will not self-cure by acid. Resin.base react io ns of GIC and behave pr imar ily like resins. Mandibu lar mo lars have a great er t endency t o have loose bands. The first mo lars st ill show highest incidence o f band fa ilure.60 . consist ing of t wo component s. The phys ical propert ies o f GIC had also been evaluat ed and st udied by var ious aut hors. t he adhesive remains aft er debonding in almost equal proport ion on ORTHODONTIC BANDS.90. Po lyacid modified co mposit e res ins (PMCR) also consist of similar co mbinat ion.. According to Mat asa.88 had obser ved similar findings in t heir st udy o f sett ing react ion of GIC. t hey were chosen for t his st udy.base react ion o f GIC.91 The so lu bilit y o f t his cement had been evaluat ed by Mit chem.

.DR.. RMGIC have been int roduced to restorat ive dent ist r y dur ing t he mid 1990s and t hen su bsequent ly int o ort hodont ics. where as Millet 54 had found t hat no significant difference exist ed bet ween RMGIC and PMCR. Fort y.five ext ract ed human mo lars were used for t he st udy.907MPa for t he co nvent io nal GIC.S. Sadiq and Hodges. 1. The pr imar y goal was to det ermine t he effic iency of t hese newer hybr id cement s and to det ect if t he in-o ffice sand blast ing o f t he used pla in bands would aid in add it io na l ret ent ion simu lat ing a clinical sit uat ion. The t eet h were in it ially cement ed wit h t he hybr id cement s namely one RMGIC and one Po lyacid modified co mposit e resin. before and aft er sandblast ing. 94 Thus. wit h t he co nvent ional GIC act ing as t he cont rol. t here have been var ious met hods t hat have bee n t est ed such as development of cement s. t reat ment of t he inner sur face o f t he bands and t he t eet h surface. bot h. M..... 80. which is in accordance t o Menneme yer et al.95 The mean values before sand blast ing were 1.Rama iah Dent al College. Mu lt iple uses and handling charact er ist ics have been discussed in dept h on it s clinical imp licat ion by S. Bangalore to evaluat e t he effect of in-o ffice sand blast ing on t he ret ent ive st rength of used plain bands wit h different lut ing agent s. The present st udy co mpared t he different lut ing cement s and inferred t hat RMGIC has great er bo nd st rengt h t han t he PMCR and co nvent io nal GIC.389 MPa for RMGIC. MDS bot h t he subst rat es.61 . t his in vit ro st udy was undert aken at t he Depart ment of Ort hodont ics and Dentofacial Ort hopedics. To achieve t his goal..058 MPa for co mpo mer and 0. Several studies have been carr ied out on t his mat er ial and t he resu lt s have been ver y encouraging. PRIYA K. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. K S idhu.

As a result . T he t hird react io n is self-cur ing o f resin mo no mers. which was in accordance w it h t he find ings of Wood et al.76 Millet et al96 has also emphasized t hat t he sand blast ing procedure had almost increased t he mean survival t ime of t he ort hodont ic bands by t hree fo lds.. PRIYA K. MDS The mean value o f 2. T he light act ivat es free radical po lymer izat ion o f HEMA and ot her 2 mo no mers t o form a po ly HEMA mat rix t hat hardens t he mat erial.. when t he powder and liquid are mixed.915 MPa for convent ional GIC respect ively were t abulat ed aft er sandblast ing.73. while t he acid base react ion occurs simult aneously and co nt inues for a per iod aft er t he mass has been cured by light act ivat ion.75 Hodges et al72 and ot hers. we also inferred t hat t he procedure of sand blast ing increased t he ret ent io n. In add it io n. It is t he light init iat ed react ion t hat allows for t he ear ly placement of t he arch wires..149 MPa for RMGIC and t he value o f 1.improved sett ing t ime... t his mat erial can be cured quickly by light act ivat ion fro m t he visible lig ht cur ing device.62 . light act ivat ed po lymer izat io n react ion is well har mo nized wit h acid base react ion in t his fo r mat ion. lo nger working t ime due to snap set by photo curing and a rapid development of early increase in st rengt h. SETTING REACTION OF RMGIC RMGIC has a sett ing mechanism by t hree react ions. It is believed t hat poly HEMA and polyacr ylic met al salt u lt imat ely for ms a ho mogenous mat rix t hat surrounds t he glass part icles. an acid base react ion similar t o t hat of convent ional GIC is in it iat ed.. which makes t he set ORTHODONTIC BANDS. The advant ages o f t he hybr id io no mer and t he resin cement over t he t radit iona l GIC include t he fo llowing.. Fro m our st udy.DR.518 MPa for co mpo mer and1.

pr ior to sandblast ing t he cement remained on t he toot h wit h respect to RMGIC and co nvent ional GIC whereas.. PRIYA K. 81 SETTING REACTION OF PMCR Co mpo mer or PMCR are co mposed of io n leachable alumino silicat e glass in a po lymeric mat rix o f carboxyl modified resin mo no mer. primer and a mo ist bonding sur face.. account ing for increase in bo nd st rengt h. They set by light cured resin react ion and not acid base and rely upon wat er diffusio n int o t he set polymer which is ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. However.. t he cement remained on t he band. it is not significant enough whe n compared to RMGIC and PMCR.63 . where t he highest bond st rengt h to enamel is att ained w it h phosphor ic acid.. Aft er sandblast ing t he fa ilure sit e was wit hin t he cement .DR. Anot her o bservat ion t hat was made. wit h PMCR.97 The current st udy did not include any sur face t reatment of ename l. t hough sandblast ing procedure had increased t he ret ent ion. It was cat egorized as t he least effect ive group in our st udy as co mposit e requires t he sur face of enamel to be et ched to aid in micro ret ent io n which has been demo nst rat ed.53 Co mpo mer as ment ioned earlier behaves pr imar ily like co mposit es.. S imilar co nclusio ns were drawn by Aggarwal et al. MDS mat r ix more tolerant to t he effect s o f mo ist ure and t hese superior propert ies. in t he st udy by Gillgrass55 it was obser ved t hat t here was no significant difference bet ween convent ional GIC and co mpomer used for band cement at ion. inferred t hat . which is more advant ageous in t he two GI groups and at t he band-cement int er face in case o f t he co mpo mer group..

but composit e had t he super ior propert ies. RMGIC and t he least being co nvent io nal GIC.64 .. a st udy co mpared var ious mat er ials t hat were rout inely used.. 99 The fluoride releasing abilit y bet ween PMCR and RMGIC concluded t hat t he fluoride levels increased dur ing t he first t hree mont hs and lat er decreased when co mpared to RMGIC.98 There are dual past e syst ems... inst ead. which set by dual cure and single past e syst ems t hat are light cure.DR. which concluded t hat co mpo mers had sig nificant ly higher hardness and co mpress ive st rengt h t han RMGIC. Ko mori100 and Karant akis37 showed t hat co mpo mer has less fluoride release t han RMGIC and convent ional GI C fro m t he init ial per iod it self. 53 In t he search of an ideal restorat ive mat er ial. The lat est int roduct ion has been t he past e-past e t ype o f RMGIC. is a resin t ype. They do not chemically adhere since t hey do not contain any po lyacid but adhesio n. Gladys102 has ext ensively st udied physico -mechanical charact erist ics o f new hybr id cement wit h co nvent io nal GIC and co mposit e and inferred t hat t he bond st rengt h in t he decreasing order as composit e fo llo wed by PMCR.. which makes clinical hardening safe and easy and had per formed well w it hout clinical failure over a ORTHODONTIC BANDS. MDS post ulat ed to allow a delayed acid base react ion t hat may release fluoride and ot her remineralis ing io ns fro m aluminosilicat e glass. PRIYA K.56 However... et ching and silanizing showed increased bond st rengt h for RMGIC fo llowed by co nvent ional GIC but highest bond st rengt h was obt ained wit h composit e resin. In order to det ermine a suit able lut ing media for ceramic restorat ion Begazo et al101 concluded t hat sandblast ing.

PRIYA K. it is easy t o handle and is more consist ent since t he need for measur ing and mixing is eliminat ed.. Anot her st udy was conduct ed by M illet 54 compar ing t wo band cement s.. This procedure invo lves spraying a st ream of aluminum oxide part icles under hig h pressure against t he met al sur face int ended for bonding.65 ... which cleans and roughens t he sur face. 82 It has beco me t he preferred surface t reat ment in met al bonding today.mont h per io d103.75 The failure rat es of 2% for t he co mmercially sandblast ed bands co mpares favorably w it h t hat found by Millet et al96 who carried out t heir own sand blast ing process.. MDS 21. However..73 A half mout h clinical t rial co mpar ing non sandblast ed and sandblast ed bands by Hodges72 had also demo nst rat ed t hat sandblast ing sig nificant ly increases bo nd st rengt h and reduced t he clinical failure rat es.100 Sand blast ing has been regarded as a for m o f macro etching. in a recent clinical st udy report ed by Ozere84 on t he self-cur ing RMGIC concluded no significant difference bet ween sandblast ed and non sandblast ed bracket s during a 20 mo nt h observat ion per iod. showed comparable st rengt h to t hat of a new bracket . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. They concluded no significant difference bet ween RMGIC and PMCR.. which were rebonded fo llowing sandblast ing.DR. Debonded bracket s. 80-100 psi o f air pressure is required and aluminum oxide part icle o f 50m has been found t o be most desirable for use in sand blast ing and resu lt ing in excellent bond st rengt h.

They co ncluded t hat to maximize t he shear bond st rengt h... A t hin o xide layer is needed for good wett ing and bonding t o t he met al. a newly et ched bracket .. They fo und significant increase in shear bond st rength associat ed w it h sand blast ing o f fo il mesh bases for all base sizes but t here was no difference bet ween t hese t wo groups. Alt hough.. It remo ves t he cont aminant s and decreases t he t hickness o f oxide layer. mechanical bonding capabilit y is t he pr imary det er minant for increased adhesio n o f sand blast ed bands.. MDS Mc Coll and Rossouw. Thus advocat ing in-o ffice sand blast ing. Grabouski105 has po int ed out t hat among co nvent ional bracket . increases sur face area for bot h chemical and mechanical bo nding. t here is no need t o increase base sur face area and t hat sand blast ing t he bases should be carr ied out rout inely just before bonding..66 . Sand blast ing increases t he ret ent ion by roughening t he sur face o f all met als including st ainless st eel and as a result . leaving a more fir mly att ached layer for bonding. also to assess t he effect of sandblast ing t he bracket s at chair side and compared it wit h micro et ched bracket s. PRIYA K. However. It must be not ed t hat t he process o f sand blast ing may also enhance t he chemical bonding capabilit y o f t he cement s. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.104 conduct ed an invest igat ion to det ermine t he relat io nship bet ween shear bond st rengt h and base sur face area for t he st andard and fo il mesh bracket bases. a debonded and sandblast ed bracket t here was no significant difference bet ween t he bond st rengt hs.DR. as wit h no n sand blast ing. t he great est increase was seen in t he RMGIC group. Bot h the procedure of sand blast ing whet her carr ied out commercially or at t he chair side affects t he bond st rengt h. In our st udy fo llowing sand blast ing we not ed a stat ist ically significant increase in force value for deband ing..

The photographs were t aken at 20KV and a mag nificat ion o f 1000X..  Last ly. The SEM photograph illust rat es t he relat ively smoot h lut ing sur face o f t he non sandblast ed bands. subsequent to cond it ioning t he t eet h sur face. t his was an in vit ro st udy and would not be able to complet ely simu lat e an oral environment where t he t eet h are const ant ly subject ed to occlusal forces.DR.. PRIYA K. t he increase in t he sur face area was seen to enhance t he pro babilit y o f mechanical and che mical bonding t hat took place wit h t he var ious cement s used and t hereby reducing t he failure rat es. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. There could be a furt her increase in bond st rengt h if t he t eet h surfaces were et ched for co mpo mers because t hese cement s do not cont ain any acid and ad hesio n is.67 . EFFECT OF OTHER EXPLANATORY VARIABLES Sand blast ing procedure has been carr ied out at 60psi as t he levels can be increased only t o t his ext ent wit h t he in-o ffice sandblast ing. The ot her lut ing agent s can be cement ed... MDS The non sandblast ed and sandblast ed bands were photo graphed using a Scanning Elect ron Microscope (SEM) direct ed at t he lut ing sur face o f t he band. inst ead a resin t ype.. in co mpar iso n wit h t he corrugat ed surface o f sandblast ed bands. Furt her invest igat ions int o t his field o f hybr id cement s would provide a meaningful insight int o t hese upcoming and pro mising mat erials..

M. Alt hough ORTHODONTIC BANDS.058MPa for co mpo mer and 0. PRIYA K. where as Millet 63 has found t hat no significant difference exist ed bet ween RMGIC and PMCR.. Fort y. Ramaiah Dent al College. The t eet h were banded using prefor med ort hodont ic plain bands t hat were used in it ially to det ermine t he bond st rengt h o f different hybr id cement s and t hen su bsequent ly sandblast ing t he same bands to det ermine t he effect of t his procedure on bond st rengt h. The mean value o f 2.149MPa for RMGI and t he va lue o f 1.518MPa for co mpo mer and1.. MDS This in vit ro st udy was aimed at evaluat ing t he increase in bond st rengt h fo llo wing sand blast ing w it h different hybr id cement s namely one RMGIC and one PMCR and t he convent ional GIC as t he cont rol and to correlat e t he effect iveness o f t his procedure of sand blast ing in a clinical sit uat ion fo llowing t he use o f a plain prefor med bands and sandblast ing in o ffice.DR. The mean values before sandblast ing were 1. The resu lt s inferred t hat t here was a st at ist ically significant increase in t he bo nd st rengt h fo llowing t he procedure of sand blast ing..68 . S. ANOVA revealed st at ist ically significant difference bet ween t he met hods and among t he lut ing cement s.. It also demonst rat ed t hat RMGIC has great er bond st rength t han t he PMCR and co nvent ional GIC.. space maint ainers and ort hodont ic bands. 1. The RMGIC lut ing cement gives ever y ind icat ion o f beco ming t he mat er ial o f cho ice for cement at ion o f crowns.389MPa for RMGIC.915MPa for convent ional GI respect ively were t abulat ed aft er sandblast ing.five ext ract ed human mo lars were used for t he st udy t hat was conduct ed at t he Depart ment of Ort hodont ics and Dento facial Ort hopedics..907MPa for t he co nvent ional GIC..

. since t he sett ing of GIC is seen t o be t he most crit ical dur ing t he first one hour due to t he for mat ion o f a weak mat rix complex o f calcium io ns and subsequent vu lnerabilit y to mo ist ure cont aminat io n. RMGIC has proven to be t he current chosen mat er ial. a light act ivat ed GIC will st ret ch t he luxur y and over co me t he hurdles. early mo ist ure sensit iv it y is considerably reduced and so lu bilit y in oral fluids is slow. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Over all GIC are import ant mat erials for modern clinical dent ist ry. The sett ing react ion is in it iat ed in t he po ly HEMA mat r ix o f RMGIC by photo act ivat ion.. ort hodont ist s face wit h bonding o f bracket s to t he post erior region also. which are more popular today wherein t he placement o f att achment is more cr it ical. Development of RMGIC has opened a new d imensio n in restorat ive dent ist ry as well as in ort hodont ics. The advent of t his mat er ial has ext ended it s use for sp lint cement at ion and bands t hat receive a face bow. which set s by neut ralizat ion react ion and has propert ies t hat r ival or exceeds t hose of RMGIC.DR. Ket ac mo lar in case o f crowns and br idges.69 . Wit h t he use o f pre-adjust ed edgewise syst ems.. Wit h all t his development on RMGIC.. MDS more lo ng-t erm dat a is needed concer ning RMGIC.. Sett ing is rapid. it might be t empt ing t o conclude t hat original self hardening GIC is obso let e. However t his is far fro m t he case.. t he fluo ride release fro m t he set cement is also comparable w it h t hat of co nvent io nal GIC providing a similar ant i car iogenic effect . PRIYA K.. t hey show remarkable pro mise for mat er ials at t his st age of development . Alo ng wit h t he increase in bond st rengt h o f RMGIC. These mat er ials t oo are indulg ing in excit ing development s o f t heir own for eg.

. but wit h current levels of int ensive research on GIC.DR. MDS No mat erial is per fect . The research is be ing direct ed towards t he impro vement of RMGIC in order to use it in t he post erior as well as ant erior segment s for bonding bracket s.. result ing in an ever improving range of mat erial o f t his t ype.. PRIYA K..70 ... ORTHODONTIC BANDS.. deficiencies t hat exist s seems t o be eliminat ed or at least reduced.

Dent . K. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1982 Feb. E. Angle Orthod 1974 July.A. Smit h D..P and Mc Lachlan. 9. Fr icker J. Mit chem JC. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 2.DR. Clinical st udies on glass io no mers. Foreman F. Brown JD. PRIYA K. Med. Scoville R.D. In vit ro fluoride upt ake by enamel adjacent to glass io no mer lut ing cement .C. Gwinnet t.71 . J Dent Child 1990 Sept -Oct . 89(3): 206-11.. Br Dent J 1968. Schwaninger B. 44(3): 218-21. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1986 Mar.. Surface d ist ribut ion o f enamel o pacit ies fo llo wing ort hodont ic t reat ment .. 4. Mizrahi. 5. 24(3): 298-303. Burgess JO. 52(2): 113-17. A 12 mo nt h st udy co mpar ing zinc phosphat e to glass io no mer. Incidence of whit e spot fo rmat ion aft er bonding and banding. 3. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1983 Oct . 81(2): 9398. Part 1. 9: 179-80. Success and failure o f banding and bonding A clinical st udy. Aust J Orthod 1985. Pred ict abilit y o f ret ent ive values o f dent al cement s. Richt er W. Br J Orthod 1977. Mizrahi. Norris S. A new dent al cement . Gorelick L. Geiger AM. 10. Ret ent ion o f ort hodo nt ic bands wit h new fluoride releasing cement s. J Prosthet Dent 1970 Sept . Angle Orthod 1982 Apr il. Hirschfield RE. Mizrahi E. E. 125: 381-84. MDS BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. 4(3): 133-37. Ret ent ion o f t he convent ional orthodont ic band. Johnston LE. 7. 8. 6.. 84(4): 323-31.. McInnes-Ledoux P.. Decalcificat ion under ort hodont ic bands. 57(5): 352-55.

47(3): 232-38. 19. Air brasive: so me fundament als. PRIYA K. J Am Dent Assoc 1955 Apr. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1988. Air abrasive t echno logy: It s new role in restorat ive dent ist r y. Hamula W. Dent al cement s in Phillipps’ Science of dental materials. Anusavice. 11 edit ion. Hot z P. St irrups. A co mparat ive clinical t rial o f a glass iono mer and a zinc phosphat e cement for securing ort hodont ic bands. Wilson AD. 142: 41-47.72 . 2003.. Black RB. Glass io no mer cement s in o rt ho dont ics – An updat e. D. Jun 93(6): 505-07.DR.. Br Dent J 1972 Feb. Sced I. 16. Bunocore. 18. Mizrahi. 17. 30(8): 428-33. 14. E.. A simple met hod of increasing adhesion of acr ylic filling mat er ial t o enamel sur face. Black RB. Mizrahi. J Dent Res 1955. The bonding o f glass io no mer cement s to met al and toot h subst rat es. Br J Orthod 1996 Aug. MDS 11. 80: 849-53. A new mo lar band. 132: 133-35. Brower Kelly. Angle Orthod 1977 July. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. J Am Dent Assoc 1950 Dec.. Mc Lean JW. ISBN: 81-8147-067-2. 20. Furt her st udies in ret ent ion of t he ort ho dont ic band. 12. 41(6): 701-10. Goldst ein RE. Br J Orthod 1991. 50(4): 408-14. Br Dent J 1977. 443..R. Hamula DW. Kent BE. Wilso n AD. 13. th 21. 18:15-20. 445: Saunders. E. 125: 551-57. 15. Parkins FM. A new t ranslucent cement for dent ist r y.. J Am Dent Assoc 1994 May.. App licat ion and revaluat ion of air abrasive t echnic.

25. 42(4): 395-98. Ret ief DH. 35(4): 278-85. 46(2): 171-18. Angle Orthod 1955 July. A new high-st rengt h co mposit e-t ype cement for ort hodont ic bands. 40(4): 329-33. Angle Orthod 1976 Apr. A co mparat ive st udy o f so me dent al cement s used in ort hodont ics.. Clinical o bservat ion on cement atio n. Angle Orthod 1975 July. 30. Elwen RB. J Clin Orthod 1973 Aug.. Am J o f Ort hod Dentofacial Ort hop 1950 Sep. Dent al cement s: A st udy o f it s propert ies o f ad hesio n. Orlowski JA. PRIYA K. 19(3): 215-20. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1977. Millet DT. The ro le o f zinc phosphat e cement in enamel sur face changes on banded t eet h. Berkson RD. Phillips RW. MDS 22.DR. An evaluat ion of silico phosphat e as an ort hodont ic cement . leinfelder KF. Angle Orthod 1965 Oct . Rich JM. Hershey GH.. 24. 31. 45(3): 219-25. Norman RD. Lee HL. 23. Swart z ML. Tat e A. 26.. Phillips RW. The per for mance of first mo lar ort hodont ic bands wit h glass io no mer cement – A ret rospect ive analysis. 27. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 36(9): 701-710. 25(3): 138-47.. Br J Orthod 1992 Aug. Clark RJ.. 28. Ret ent ion o f ort hodont ic bands as influenced by t he cement ing media. The abilit y o f zinc phosphat e and hydro phosphat e cement s to seal band spaces. 29.73 . Sadowsky PL. Wist h PJ. Adams WM.. Gordon PH. 7(8): 514-519. 7(2): 190-96. Williams JD. An in vit ro st udy o f cement ret ent ion as relat ed to ort hodont ics. Angle Orthod 1970 Oct . Wist h PJ. Angle Orthod 1972 Oct .

Wilso n AD. Wit t shire W. Cr isp S. Sakamaki ST. Angle Orthod 1963 Oct . Lewis BG. 37.. 55(6): 1032-41. 79(4): 239-46. a co mpo mer and a co mposit e resin in wat er. PRIYA K. Wilson AD. Bahn AN. 39.. Craig RG. Fajeir VB et al. 56(2): 203.io no mer cement s. Cameron JC. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1990 Apr. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop Aug. Karant akis P. 34. Glass io no mer cement s: Chemist ry o f erosion.74 . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 36. A S hear bo nd st rengt h o f GI for direct bonding in o rt hodont ics. 106(2): 127-30. and lact ic acid. 38. Angle Orthod 1979 Oct .. MDS 32.. E ffect of ort hodontic banding on localized oral lactobacilli (review and abst ract ). Quintessence Int 1994 Sep. Theodoridou-Pahini S. Helvat joglou-Antoniades M. J Dent Res 1976 Nov. J Prosthet Dent 1981 Nov. Some propert ies of dent al cement s o f specific import ance in t he cement at ion o f ort ho dont ic bands. 35. Oper Dent 2000 Jan-Feb. Working qualit ies o f g lass. Fluor ide release fro m t hree glass io no mers. 25(9): 587-89. 33(4): 233-45. 46(5): 525-30.. Proposed no menclat ure for glassio no mer dent al cement s and relat ed mat erials. 97(4): 316-22. The recement at ion of ort hodont ic bands using different cement s. art ificial saliva.. Papadogiannis Y.. N icho lson JW.DR. 33. Am J of Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994 Aug. An invit ro evaluat ion o f bond st rengt h of 3 GIC. Mizrahi E. Reisbick MH. 40. Charbeneau GT. Mc Lean JW. 25(1): 20-5.

Wr ight AB. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1981 Apr. Gordon PH.. A laboratory invest igat ion int o cement s used to ret ain ort hodont ic bands. 48. Angle Orthod 1998 Aug. Kamahli. Aust in JC. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1996 Nov. 105(2): 135-41. Young KA. Br J Orthod 1994 Feb. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1986 Jun.75 . Co mparat ive laboratory invest igat io n o f dual-cured vs. Millet D. Co mpton AM... 89(6): 528. 42. Cleaton-Jones PE.. Durning P. 68 (4): 345-50. Clinical and micro bio logic evaluat ion of a resin modified g lass io no mer for ort ho dont ic bo nding.DR. Mc Cart hy MF.. PRIYA K. 101(2): 138-44. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. co nvent io nal glass io no mer cement s for band cement at ion. Lorton L. Mechanical and bond st rengt h propert ies o f lig ht cured and che mically cured glass io no mer cement s. Hondrum SO. 43. Lee RT. Am J of Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992 Feb. 5: 307-13.. 110(5): 469-75. Mc Cabe JF. 47. 46. Mizrahi E. Nissen-Meyer HI.T. Kvam E. Compar ison bet ween a zinc phosphat e cement and a g lass io no mer cement for cement atio n o f ort hodont ic bands. 79(4): 390-98. Co mpar ison o f t he shear bond st rengt h o f a light -cured glass io no mer and a chemically cured glass io no mer for use as an ort hodont ic bo nding agent . Hondrum S O. 44. Broach J. 21(2): 27-32. 45. Copenhaver DJ.. MDS 41. Lynch E. In vit ro co mpar ison o f zinc phosphat e and glass io no mer cement s’ abilit y to inhibit decalcificat ion under ort hodont ic bands (review and abst ract s). Eur J Orthod 1983. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1994 Feb. Effect of sur face co nt aminat ion on band ret ent ion.

Wo ngsr imo nko l T. Bernal V. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 118(3): 288-94. Jokobsen JR. 53. McCluskey L. Newell J. 120(4): 398-05. J Clin Orthod 1998 May. Fornell AC.mo dified glass po lyalkenoat e cement s under different sur face co nd it io ns.. Schlenker WL. Hallgren A. Angle Orthod 2001 Dec.mo dified GIC and po lyacid. 120(1): 49-53. Fo ley T F. Modified composit e or convent ional glass io no mer for band cement at ion? A co mparat ive clinical t rail.Mant e FK. Brendlinger DL. Journal of Orthodontics 2000 Sep. Brendlinger EJ. 56. Love J. 32(5): 299-302.. 71(6): 470-76. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1999 May.. Current product s and pract ice Ort hodont ic banding cement s. Shear bond st rengt h of t wo resin. Binder RE.modified co mposit e resin. Rix D.. T jan AHL. 55. Bishara SE. A clinical ret rospect ive evaluat ion of 2 ort hodont ic band cement s... Effect of alt er ing t he t ype o f enamel co nd it io ner on t he shear bond st rengt h of a resin-reinforced g lass io no mer adhesive. 115(5): 533-35. J Clin Orthod 1998 July. Benington PCM. Gillgrass TJ. VonWald L. 27(3): 283-84. 32(7): 423-26. Bant ing D. 54.mod ified glass io no mer cement s to porcela in. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2001 July. 51. Laffoon JF. Chr ist ie H. A co mpar ison o f fluor ide re lease by resin. Am J of Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000 Sept .. Millet DT. Millet DT. Johnson N.DR. Mamandras A. Vaidanat han T K. PRIYA K. McAuley F. 50. Cohen SM. 52. Bond st rengt hs o f t wo resin. Shear bond st rengt h o f chemically and light -cure resin modified io no mers. Gilmour WH. Chung HC. Beress A.A. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2001 Oct .76 . MDS 49. Marulli R.

58. 9: 208-210. 64. 73(1): 56-63.band. An ex vivo evaluat ion of resin . Nakahara R. 61. 73(4): 436-44.modified co mposit e resins as ort hodont ic band cement s.modified glass polyalkenoat es and po lyacid. Glossary of orthodontic terms. Angle Orthod 2003 Aug. Pullen HA.modified glass io no mer cement on enamel demineralizat ion around ort hodont ic bracket s. Cur y JA.. 189 Quint essence. 66.. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1921.. St ainless st eel pla in band versus clamp bands for mo lar t eet h. MDS 57. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Navarro MFL. Angle Orthod 1932 Oct . Bond st rengt h of ort hodont ic bracket s using different light and self-cur ing cement s. 125(1): 36-41. Daskalogiannakis J. Element ar y ort hodont ic t echnique. Co ups-Smit h KS. Po llock HC. Technique of t he pinch. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1923. PRIYA K. 59. 2000 ISBN: 3-87652-760-0 63.. Toledano M. Osorio E Romeo A.. 7(10): 523-28. 31: 323-28. 5(2): 114-123.. Glass io no mer cement s as lut ing agent for ort hodont ic bracket s. 65. Knox J. Brodie AG. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2004 Jan. Higuera BI Garcia-godoy. In vivo effect of resin. Angle Orthod 1935 Apr.it ley KC. 60. 73(4): 451-56. 62.. Durning P. 2(4): 260-269.77 . Osorio R. Direct met hods of making mo lar bands. Kit ayama Y. Pascotto RC. Fr iel S. Angle Orthod 2003 Aug. Tensile and shear bond st rengt h o f resinreinforced glass io no mer cement to glazed porcelain.DR. Journal of Orthodontics 2004 Dec. Chye KY. Ko mori A. Filho LC. Angle Orthod 2003 Feb. Rossouw PE.

Angle Orthod 1996 May. Guray E. Paskow H. Sidney Brandt . Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1996 Jul.T. ORTHODONTIC BANDS.DR. 110(1) 96-98. 70. Hodges SJ. Zachr isson BU. Air abrasio n o f failed bonded met al bracket s: A st udy o f shear bond st rengt h and surface charact er ist ics as det ermined by scanning elect ron microscopy. Fornell AC Robert son.78 . Cement ex... 73. E ffect s of different roughening met hods on band ret ent ion. Johnson LN. 75. Karaman AH. 76. Edit ors corner. 77. 115(6): 667-74. 30(4): 217-22. 27(12) 661-75. Hallgren A. 72.. J Clin Orthod 1974 Sep. measurement . MDS 67. 74. PRIYA K.. J Clin Orthod 1997 Jun. 69.inso luble car ies prevent ive cement . 71. Buyukyilmaz T.. Eur J Orthod 2001 Feb.. 68. 20 (4): 212-14. J Clin Orthod 1993 Dec. Recent advances in bo nding to gold.. Bonded mo lar t ubes: A retrospect ive evaluat ion o f clinical per for mance. Neuman G. J Clin Orthod 1996 Apr. Sandblast ing o f bands to increase bond st rengt h. 31(6): 361-66. 66(3): 207-14. OUP Publicat ion: 1120. 8(9): 525-527. J Clin Orthod 1968 Dec. The effect of micro -et ching on t he ret ent ion of ort hodont ic mo lar bands: a clinical t rial. 23(1):91-97. Hunt NP. Angle Orthod 1950 Oct . Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1999 Jun. The effect of sand blast ing on t he ret ent io n of ort hodont ic bands. 2(12): 491. Wood DP. and ut ilizat ion o f t apered mo lar bands. Millet D. Palenczny GJ. Simp licit y in t he preparat ion. Zernik JH. Miller S. An. Oxf ord Dictionary. amalga m and porcelain. Gilt horpe MS. Sonis AL.

Ozer M.79 . 115 (2): 143-47. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2003 Jan.. Bonding o f hybr id io no mer s and res in cement s to modified ort hodont ic band mat er ials. J Clin Orthod 1988 Mar. 82. Ar ici S. Rix D. 81. McCo ll J. Aggarwal M. Catt anach D. PRIYA K. Mui B. 87. 117 (1): 15-19. 22(3): 165-69. Crisp S. A co mpar ison o f shear-peel band st rengt hs o f 5 ort hodont ic cement s. Mennemeyer V. MDS 78. Swart z ML. Akca E. Long term F release fro m glass io no mer cement . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. The effect of enamel a ir abrasio n on t he ret ent ion of bonded met allic ort hodont ic bracket s.modified glass io no mer in vivo. J Dent Res 1974 Nov-Dec 53(6): 1408-11. Clark HE. Angle Orthod 1999 Feb. 86. Fo ley TF. 80. Patt ison J. 69 (1): 58-64. Angle Orthod 2005 May. J Dent Res 1984 Feb. Powers JM.modified glass io no mer for ort hodont ic bonding. Wilson AD. Deco mpo sit io n o f t he powder.DR.. Dasch W. Opt im izat ion o f a procedure for rebonding dislodged ort hodont ic bracket s.. 69 (3): 276-281. 85. 84.. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2000 Jan. Neuman P. Angle Orthod 1999 Jun. Seeho lzer HW. Canay S. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1999 Feb. In vit ro compar ison o f ort hodont ic band cement s. Kocadereli I. 70(4): 308-16. Rossouw PE. Band ing wit h glass iono mer cement . Mc Fadzean. 63(2): 158-160. Phillips RW. 123 (1): 15-20. 79.. Millet . Laboratory evaluat ion o f a co mpo mer and a resin.. Angle Orthod 2000 Aug. React ion in glass io no mer cement s: I. 75(3): 406-09.. 83. Millet DT. Kulkar ni GV. Sandblast ed met al bracket s bonded wit h resin.

MDS 88. 94. Swart z AL.. Crisp S. Mat asa CG. Br J Orthod 1995 may. Gordon PH.modified cement s for improved band ret ent ion? Journal of Orthodontics 2005 Jun. Br Dent J 1979 May. J Prosthet Dent 1984 Aug. Dental Update 1996 Jan-Feb.io no mer lut ing cement s. Bennet TG. React ion in glass io no mer cement s: II. Sidhu SK. 95(4): 355-56.hardening glass. PRIYA K. You C.. 96. 90. Sadiq S K. Pringuer MA. 97. Development and use o f wat er. Phillips RW. 95. Wat son TF. Powers JM. Wilso n AD. Carter NE. Mit chem JC.. Wilso n AD. Some propert ies o f a glass io no mer cement . 25(4): 283-91. 32(2): 140. Hodges SJ. An infrared spect roscopic st udy. Tat e WH.. 22(2): 161-169. Adhesio n and it s t en commandment s. 93. Wilson HJ. Sandblast ed bands and resin.80 . 96: 785-91. Gronas DG.. 92. Resin.. Oper Dent 2000 Jul-Aug. J Am Dent Assoc 1978 May. Mc Cabe JF.. Wardlewort h D. An in vit ro st udy o f cert ain propert ies o f a glass iono mer cement . ORTHODONTIC BANDS. 40(4): 453-56. 146: 279-81. Posser HJ. Millet DT. Mc Cabe JF.DR. 23(1): 12 –16. The effect of sandblast ing on t he ret ent ion o f first mo lar ort hodont ic bands ce ment ed wit h glass io no mer cement . J Dent Res 1974 Nov-Dec. Mc Lean JW. Bond st rengt h o f co mpo mers to human enamel. Maldo nado A. 91. J Prosthet Dent 1978 Oct . 52(2): 175-81.mod ified glass io no mer mat er ials Part 2: Clinica l aspect s. Am Journal of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1989 Apr. 89. Clinical evaluat ion o f cement so lu bilit y. 53(6): 1414-19.

An in vit ro st udy. Gladys S. ORTHODONTIC BANDS. Yamada T. Co mparat ive physico -chemica l charact er izat ion o f new hybr id restorat ive mat er ials wit h co nvent ional glassio no mer and resin co mposit e restorat ive mat er ials. Boer HD. Klever laan CJ. 102. The relat ionship bet ween bond st rengt h and ort hodont ic bracket base sur face area w it h co nvent io nal and microet ched fo il. 104.. Iwaku M.mod ified g lass. PRIYA K. Dental Research 1997 Apr.. St aley RN. Short -t erm clinical evaluat ion o f a resin. 84(3): 444-52 100. Mc Coll and Rossouw. Evaluat ion o f a new 2-past e glass io no mer cement . 120(1): 45-48. Okamot o A. Abu-Bakr N.DR. van Waas MAJ. 105. Yoneda S. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 2001 Jul. Dental Materials 2004 Dec.. Vanher le G.81 . Quintessence Int 2005 Jan. Begazo CC. Komor i A. Han L. Ewoldsen and Denice. Meerbeek BV.io nno mer lut ing cement . Fe ilze AJ. 20(10): 901-07. Grabouski JK. 113(3): 276-8. 123(6): 649-52. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1998 Oct . 76(4): 883-94. Jakobsen JR. Am J of Orthod Dentof acial Orthop 1998 Mar. Sugizaki J... 113 (4): 452-60. 103. Shear bond st rengt h of different t ypes of lut ing cement s to an alu minum oxide-reinforced glass ceramic core mat erial. MDS 98. Ko jima I. Braem M. 101.. Changes in t he mechanical propert ies and sur face t ext ure of co mpo mer immersed in var ious media. Review o f ort hodont ic cement s and adhes ives. J Prosthet Dent 2000 Oct .mesh bases. The effect of micro et ching on t he bond st rengt h of met al bracket s when bonded t o previously bonded t eet h.. 99. Morigami M. Am J of Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003 Jun. 36(1): 49-53.

14. 70. 77. 80 Band-cement 9. 67. 77. 53. 58 Charbeneau 74 Chemistry 16 Clinical 8. 79. 79 Bracket 8. 49. 10. 21. 11. 73. 73 Adhesive 1. 30. 61. 69. 20. 60. 33. 18. 9. 76. 81 Bonding 7. 60. 16. 65. 74. 22. 77. 75. 19. 27. 22. 50. 78 Burgess 71 Buyuk 27 Buyukyilmaz 78 C Calcified 15 Calcium 69 Cameron 17 Canay 30. 27. 20. 23. 79 Carbide 28. 74. 11. 10. 75. 73. 10. 21. 58. 63 Benington 76 Benzoic 1 Berkson 73 Bishara 21 Bonded 8. 14. 75. 71. 71. 27. 72. 76. 66 Compton 20 . 20. 9. 64. 20. 80. 72. 67. 64. 29. 81 Braem 81 Brandt 25. 72. 63.INDEX A Abrasive 27. 63. 69. 63. 27. 78. 8. 63. 60 Ceramic 64. 30. 65. 72. 78. 26. 34. 14. 65. 30. 80. 79. 25. 9. 58. 15. 76 Aggarwal 29. 11. 29 Carboxyl 58. 79. 22. 68. 22. 71. 29. 11. 59. 78. 79. 59. 29. 13. 20. 12. 65 Andrew 28 Anusavice 72 Armamentarium 6 Arthur 17 Auto-polymer 32 B Band 6. 23. 68. 79 Akca 79 Alcohol 14 Alkaline 59 Alumina 31 Aluminum 2. 81 Cervical 18. 35. 66. 20. 10. 25. 16. 13. 65. 19. 78. 15. 63 Carboxylic 59 Carthy 20 Cement 3. 66. 81 Cohesive 60 Commercially 32. 28. 81 Cementation 3 Cements 2. 32. 76. 24. 8. 29. 29. 30. 73. 65. 33. 18. 60. 70. 29. 71. 23. 17. 18. 78. 19. 58. 60. 27. 54. 5. 72 Abrasives 27 Abu-bakr 81 Acrylic 31 Adams 14. 52. 32. 8. 53. 14. 10. 69. 61. 67. 7. 21. 11. 20.

18. 32. 22. 75. 31 Copenhaver 19. 23 Environment 67 Etching 65 Ethoxy 1 Experiment 9 Explanatory 67 Extracted 2 F Fadzean 79 Failure 9. 60 Deficiencies 70 Definition 13. 72. 64. 69 Cure 20. 31. 21. 58. 23. 76 Curing 62 Custom 32 D Dasch 79 Debanded 33 Debanding 2. 19. 30. 30. 22. 6 Embedded 59 Enamel 8. 71. 27 Dental 13. 68. 78 Hamula 25 Hardening 64. 75. 77. 75 Hybrid 60 Hydro 18. 23.Conventional 2. 33 Debonding 29. 65. 21. 58 Crowns 3. 6. 20. 27. 81 Gronas 80 H Hallgren 76. 63. 32. 73 Hygiene 8 I Incubator 6. 29. 24. 81 Dual-cured 75 Durable 24 E Electron 1. 71 Fluid 59 Fluids 8. 73. 60. 11. 80 Grabouski 66. 69. 76 Gordon 73. 23. 15. 79. 80 Hardness 64 Hershey 73 Hondrum 20. 69 Fluoride 15 G Garcia-godoy 77 George 25 Germany 31 Gibbon 13 Gillgrass 22. 63. 76. 6. 31 Investigation 2 . 75 Coupling 26 Coups 22 Crown 33. 72. 11. 21. 81 Dentofacial 74. 80. 29. 19. 14. 76. 16. 58. 64. 80 Enamel-cement 22.

10. 47. 15. 37. 75. 62. 31. 52. 55. 80 Mechanical 10. 74. 73. 78. 31. 22. 65. 57 Methodology 4 Micrographs 10. 6 Microscopy 78 Miller 28. 33 Non-sandblasted 2. 66. 24. 14. 6. 80 Mizrahi 18. 45. 68. 38. 5. 59. 25. 62. 73. 29. 30. 19. 75. 80 Jelly 33 Johan 15. 80 Nox 23 J L Laboratory 9. 18. 64. 30. 8. 40. 79 Method 3. 15. 79. 68. 33 M Machine 31. 49 Mamandras 76 Materials 72. 50. 76. 54. 57 Nov-dec 79. 5. 54. 34. 81 . 19. 32. 56. 7. 66. 75. 78 Johnston 71 Joseph 28 Journal 76. 61. 76. 53. 78 Millet 21. 36. 55. 35. 53. 77. 41. 29. 21. 49. 79 Lactobacilli 17. 57. 11. 32. 26. 55. 43. 81 Mccluskey 76 Mcinnes-ledoux 71 O Orthodontic 1. 67. 48. 70. 23. 27. 2. 65. 51. 16. 17. 63. 44. 29. 71. 19. 56. 72.Ionomer 1 Itayama 22 Iwaku 81 Jakobsen 81 Jan-feb 74. 14. 27 Microscope 1. 54. 28. 77. 20 Molars 2 K N Knox 77 Kocadereli 79 Nakahara 77 Newton 49 Newtons 2. 3. 78. 33. 74 Leachable 60. 34. 20. 18 Johnson 21. 76. 63 Lewi 74 Lingual 6. 59. 4. 27. 60. 79. 25. 42. 52. 58. 13. 12. 61. 80. 46. 20. 56. 27. 39. 75 Mechanics 58 Meerbeek 81 Mennemeyer 29. 69. 9.

6. 17.Orthodontics 76. 26. 71. 56. 67. 66. 33. 35. 62. 78. 74. 63. 29. 62. 39. 49. 81 Procedure 2. 63. 45. 34. 52. 55. 68. 67. 14. 80 Photograph 67 Photographs 67 Plaque 8 Pollock 24 Polyacid 17. 32 Polymerising 31 Porcelain 22. 41. 30. 11. 34. 6. 7. 52. 77 S Sadowsky 73 Saline 33 Saliva 74 Samuel 17 Sand 10. 8. 65. 6. 68. 22. 2. 81 P Parkins 72 Particles 2 Pascal 1 Pascotto 23. 56. 67. 5. 79 Procedures 11. 3. 64. 53. 28. 77 Paskow 78 Periodontal 2 Phillipps 72 Phillips 73. 8. 12. 28. 27. 51. 12. 63. 32 Resin-reinforced 22 Resins 16. 49. 77 Pumice 33 Pvc 6 R Reisbick 16 Renata 23 Research 10. 31. 44. 77. 61. 7. 66. 28. 37. 19. 78 Sandblast 10. 21. 65. 5. 9. 13. 46. 50. 66. 27 Sands 24 Saunders 72 Sced 72 Schlenker 76 Schwaninger 71 Science 72 Shear-peel 79 Sheldon 24 Sidney 25 . 79. 58. 3. 42. 66 Ozere 65 Q Quintessence 74. 36. 60. 65. 61. 58 Product 31. 31 Sandblasting 2. 53. 54. 69. 80. 10. 60. 32. 62. 76. 8. 34. 65. 34. 18. 75. 68. 64. 27. 77 Primer 63 Priya 1. 6. 47. 65. 53. 20. 40. 15. 22. 78. 62. 38. 52. 10. 43. 80 Oxide 2. 4. 48. 81 Researchers 15 Resin-modified 31. 54. 59. 19. 17. 16. 77. 70. 72. 57 Sandblaster 2. 30. 12. 70. 25. 50. 51. 23. 80 Sandblasted 2. 79. 76 Pullen 24. 11. 79. 49. 61. 23. 24. 55. 73. 27. 28. 57. 68. 50. 29. 67. 66. 11.

Silane 21 Silanizing 64 Silver 24 Smith 22 Stainless 1. 55. 18. 35. 58. 52. 6. 20. 53. 31 V Value 2. 68 Values 5. 54. 13. 49. 14. 9. 57 Stress-strain 2 T Technique 77 Teeth 2. 52. 75 . 16. 56. 21 Strength 2. 52. 54. 78 Wright 20 X Xylic 58 Y Yamada 81 Yilmk 27 Yoneda 81 Yoshitak 22 Young 13. 2 Stanley 28 Stephen 20. 55. 15. 16. 71. 56. 49. 28. 19. 68. 62. 75 Z U Ultrasonic 6. 53. 66. 61. 7. 31 Tensile 77 Theodori 74 Toledano 22 Tukey 35 Wilson 9. 72. 7. 18. 62. 73 Zachrisson 27 Zerni 78 Zernik 28 Zinc 8. 72. 50. 57. 50. 80 Wood 28. 73. 79. 53. 71 Vonwald 76 W Welder 31 Williams 13. 14. 74.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful