COMPARACIÓN DEL TIEMPO DE FOTOPOLIMERIZACIÓN CON EL USO DE DIFERENTES INTENSIDADES DE LED EN LA ADHESIÓN DE BRACKETS DE ORTODONCIA

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.9771/cmbio.v23i1.53194

Palabras clave:

light curing, shear strenght, remnant adhesive index

Resumen

Objective: To compare the shear bond strength of metallic brackets after orthodontic bonding using conventional and high-intensity light curing devices.

Methods: Eighty bovine central incisors were randomly divided into four groups according to curing time and LED devices: G1- Use of conventional LED LCU curing for 20 seconds (Emitter D - Wireless, Schuster, Brazil); G2-  High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Valo Cordless, Ultradent Products, USA); G3- High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (Flash Max P4 Ortho Pro, CMS Dental A / S, Denmark) and G4 - High Intensity LED LCU for 3 seconds (LEDX-T 2400 Orthometric, Brazil). Twenty-four hours after bonding, brackets were subjected to a universal testing machine with a shear bond strength (SBS) test. The Enamel surface was visually evaluated with the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI). The one-way ANOVA was performed to compare the SBS between the different light-curing devices. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was compared with the chi-square test.

Results: There were no significant differences between the groups (p = 0.767). The analysis of the adhesive remnant index also showed no statistically significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion: There was no difference in the shear bond strength and ARI index with a curing time of 3 seconds in high-intensity LCU and 20 seconds in conventional LCU.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Descargas

Publicado

2024-06-04

Cómo citar

Ceribelli, B. M., Cotrin, P., Hermont Cançado, R. ., Pinelli Valarelli, F., & Salvatore de Freitas, K. M. (2024). COMPARACIÓN DEL TIEMPO DE FOTOPOLIMERIZACIÓN CON EL USO DE DIFERENTES INTENSIDADES DE LED EN LA ADHESIÓN DE BRACKETS DE ORTODONCIA. Revista De Ciências Médicas E Biológicas, 23(1), 62–66. https://doi.org/10.9771/cmbio.v23i1.53194

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a