Journal Article

Microleakage between composite–wire and composite–enamel interfaces of flexible spiral wire retainers. Part 1: comparison of three composites

Tancan Uysal, Asli Baysal, Serdar Usumez and Mustafa Ulker

in The European Journal of Orthodontics

Published on behalf of European Orthodontics Society

Volume 31, issue 6, pages 647-651
Published in print December 2009 | ISSN: 0141-5387
Published online October 2009 | e-ISSN: 1460-2210 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp038
Microleakage between composite–wire and composite–enamel interfaces of flexible spiral wire retainers. Part 1: comparison of three composites

Show Summary Details

Preview

The aim of this investigation was to test the hypothesis that there is no difference in microleakage between composite–enamel and composite–wire interfaces, when different composites are used. Forty-five freshly extracted human mandibular incisors separated into three groups were used in the study. Multi-stranded 0.0215 inch diameter wire was bonded to enamel using two conventional (Transbond XT and Transbond LR) and a flowable (Venus Flow) orthodontic composite. The specimens were sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5 per cent basic fuchsine for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for microleakage at the composite–enamel and composite–wire interfaces from the mesial and distal margins. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U-tests with a Bonferroni correction.

Little or no microleakage was observed between the composite–enamel interfaces for the three investigated composites, and any difference was not statistically significant. However, statistically significant differences were found between microleakage at the composite–wire interface for both the conventional and flowable composite groups (P < 0.001). Flowable composite showed the highest leakage (mean: 4.8 ± 0.8 mm), while Transbond XT (mean: 0.5 ± 0.3 mm) and Transbond LR (mean: 1.1 ± 1.2 mm) showed significantly lower and comparable results. The amount of microleakage at the wire–composite interface was significantly greater than that at the enamel–composite interface of flexible spiral wire retainers (FSWRs). The null hypothesis is therefore rejected. Flowable composites may not be appropriate for bonding FSWRs.

Journal Article.  2711 words.  Illustrated.

Subjects: Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.