Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations

Objectives: To compare the effects of etching time and bonding agent application on the shear bond strength of compomer bonding in orthodontic bite raising.

Methods: Seventy-five sectioned crown of maxillary premolar teeth were embedded in acrylic rings. The samples were divided into 5 groups according to enamel surface preparation before applying Ultra Band-Lok® (Reliance Orthodontic Products). Group 1: without surface preparation, Group 2: etched with 37% phosphoric acid (Kerr Gel Etchant, Kerr®) for 15 seconds, Group 3: etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds, then apply bonding (OptiBond™ FL), Group 4: etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 30 seconds and Group 5: etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 30 seconds, then apply bonding. All samples were put through the thermocycling procedure and then shear bond strength was tested using the Universal Testing Machine. The mean and standard deviation of shear bond strength were statistically analyzed with two-way ANOVA and the enamel surface was observed by scanning electron microscope at 10,000x magnifications.

Result: In Group 1, all Ultra Band-Lok® dislodged from the enamel surface during the thermocycling process. Consequently, shear bond strength testing could not be conducted for Group 1. The mean shear bond strength of Groups 2-5 were 19.80±7.06, 18.97±4.60, 18.04±5.09 and 16.80±5.47 MPa respectively. The mean shear bond strength of each group was not statistically significant difference (p=0.887).

Conclusions: Varying enamel etching times (15 and 30 seconds) did not affect the compomer shear bond strength. Furthermore, the application of a bonding agent during tooth surface preparation did not significantly improve the bond strength between the compomer and the tooth surface.

1. Singh G, Gupta H, Rathi A, Bisht D, Goyal V, Singh R, Dhawan S. The use of bite raisers in orthodontic treatment -a review of literature. Acta Sci Dent Sci. 2021;5(4):219-28.

2. Philippe J. Treatment of deep bite with bonded biteplanes. J Clin Orthod. 1996;30(7):396-400.

3. Tait A, Mandall N, Lewis D, Littlewood S. The role of removable appliances in contemporary orthodontics. Br Dent J. 2001;191:304-10.

4. Kravitz ND, Jorgensen G, Frey S, Cope J. Resin bite turbos. J Clin Orthod. 2018;52(9):456-61.

5. Batoni G, Pardini M, Giannotti A, Ota F, Giuca MR, Gabriele M, et al. Effect of removable orthodontic appliances on oral colonisation by mutans streptococci in children. Eur J Oral Sci. 2001;109(6):388-92.

6. Kılınç DD, Sayar G. Comparison of shear bond strength of three different adhesives used as temporary bite raiser in daily orthodontic practice. Int Orthod. 2018;16(3):440-9.

7. Mayes JH. New levels of bite-opening acceleration. Clin Impress. 1997;6:15-7.

8. Roy AS, Singh GK, Tandon P, De N. An interim bite raiser. Int J Orthod Milwaukee. 2013;24(2):63-4.

9. Attin T, Vataschki M, Hellwig E. Properties of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials and two polyacid-modified resin composite materials. Quintessence Int. 1996;27(3):203-9.

10. Xie H, Zhang F, Wu Y, Chen C, Liu W. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement. Aust Dent J. 2008;53(4):325-31.

11. Welbury RR, Shaw AJ, Murray JJ, Gordon PH, McCabe JF. Clinical evaluation of paired compomer and glass ionomer restorations in primary molars: final results after 42 months. Br Dent J. 2000;189(2):93-7.

12. Triana R, Prado C, Garro J, García-Godoy F. Dentin bond strength of fluoride-releasing materials. Am J Dent. 1994;7(5):252-4.

13. Prasansuttiporn T, Promchaiwattana P, Thanatvarakorn O, Krongbaramee T, Jittidecharaks S. Adhesive systems on bond strength between dentin and compomer base materials. CM Dent J. 2016;37(2):91-100.

14. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175-91.

15. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149-60.

16. Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod. 1984;85(4):333-40.

17. McLean JW, Nicholson JW, Wilson AD. Proposed nomenclature for glass-ionomer dental cements and related materials. Quintessence Int. 1994;25(9):587-9.

18. Meyer JM, Cattani-Lorente MA, Dupuis V. Compomers: between glass-ionomer cements and composites. Biomaterials. 1998;19(6):529-39.

19. Peutzfeldt A, Garcia-Godoy F, Asmussen E. Surface hardness and wear of glass ionomers and compomers. Am J Dent. 1997;10(1):15-7.

20. Yap AU, Chung SM, Chow WS, Tsai KT, Lim CT. Fracture resistance of compomer and composite restoratives. Oper Dent. 2004;29(1):29-34.

21. Nicholson JW, Millar BJ, Czarnecka B, Limanowska-Shaw H. Storage of polyacid-modified resin composites ("compomers") in lactic acid solution. Dent Mater. 1999;15(6):413-6.

22. Nicholson J, Czarnecka B, Limanowska-Shaw H. A preliminary study of the effect of glass-ionomer and related dental cements on the pH of lactic acid storage solutions. Biomaterials. 1999;20:155-8.

23. Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers P. Class II restorations in primary teeth: 7-Year study on three resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer. Eur J Oral Sci. 2004;112:188-96.

24. Andersson-Wenckert IE, Folkesson UH, van Dijken JW. Durability of a polyacid-modified composite resin (compomer) in primary molars. a multicenter study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997;55(4):255-60.

25. Products RO. Ultra Band-Lok - Light Cure Compomer Band Cement 2022 [updated 2022 Mar 21; cited 2022 May 22. Available from: https://www.relianceorthodontics.com/Ultra-Band-Lok.

26. Lopes G, Thys D, Klaus P, Oliveira G, Widmer N. Enamel acid etching: a review. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007;28:18-24.

27. Al-Suleiman M, Baba F, Sawan M, Suliman A. Mechanical evaluation of the effect of reducing phosphoric acid concentrations and etching duration on the bond strength of orthodontic brackets. J Dent Oral Disord Ther. 2014;2(2):1-5.

28. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28(3):215-35.

29. Erickson R, Barkmeier W, Latta M. The role of etching in bonding to enamel: A comparison of self-etching and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems. Dent Mater. 2009;25:1459-67.

30. Barkmeier WW, Shaffer SE, Gwinnett AJ. Effects of 15 vs 60 second enamel acid conditioning on adhesion and morphology. Oper Dent. 1986;11(3):111-6.

31. Wang WN, Lu TC. Bond strength with various etching times on young permanent teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;100(1):72-9.

32. Wang WN, Yeh CL, Fang BD, Sun KT, Arvystas MG. Effect of H3PO4 concentration on bond strength. Angle Orthod. 1994;64(5):377-82.

33. Ravichandran NK, Tumkur Lakshmikantha H, Park HS, Jeon M, Kim J. Analysis of enamel loss by prophylaxis and etching treatment in human tooth using optical coherence tomography: an in vitro study. J Healthc Eng. 2019;2019:1-9.

34. Kim SK, Jeong TS, Kim S. A study on the microleakage of compomer restorations in cervical cavities of primary molars according to the length of etching time. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent. 2000;27(2):229-36.

35. Morresi AL, D'Amario M, Capogreco M, Gatto R, Marzo G, D'Arcangelo C, Monaco A. Thermal cycling for restorative materials: Does a standardized protocol exist in laboratory testing? A literature review. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014;29:295-308.

36. Fujishima A, Miyazaki T, Suzuki E, Miyazaki T. Tensile strength of posterior composite resins after water immersion. Japan J Cons Dent. 1990;33:1242-50.

37. Hammouda IM, Al-Wakeel EE. Effect of water storage on fluoride release and mechanical properties of a polyacid-modified composite resin (compomer). J Biomed Res. 2011;25(4):254-8.

38. Milleding P, Ahlgren F, Wennerberg A, Ortengren U, Karlsson S. Microhardness and surface topography of a composite resin cement after water storage. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11(1):21-6.

39. Nicholson JW, Alsarheed M. Changes on storage of polyacid-modified composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25(8):616-20.

40. Attaie AB, Ouatik N. 19 - Esthetics and pediatric dentistry. In: Aschheim KW, editor. Esthetic Dentistry (Third Edition). St. Louis: Mosby; 2015. p. 423-39.

41. Restoration of teeth (simple restorations) and preventative dentistry. In: Walmsley AD, Walsh TF, Lumley PJ, Burke FJT, Shortall ACC, Hayes-Hall R, Pretty IA, editors. Restorative Dentistry (Second Edition). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2007. p. 73-87.

42. Donly KJ, Sasa IS. 21 - Dental Materials. In: Nowak AJ, Christensen JR, Mabry TR, Townsend JA, Wells MH, editors. Pediatric Dentistry (Sixth Edition). Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019. p. 293-303.

43. Nicholson JW, Singh G. The use of organic compounds of phosphorus in clinical dentistry. Biomaterials. 1996;17(21):2023-30.

44. Anusavice KJ. Phillips' Science of Dental Materials. 11th ed. London: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2003.

45. Chandra SP, Chandra S, Chandra G. Textbook of operative dentistry (with MCQs). New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Ltd.; 2007.

46. Reynolds I. A review of direct orthodontic bonding. Br J Orthod. 1975;2(3):171-8.

47. Brantley WA, Eliades T. Orthodontic materials: scientific and clinical aspects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;119(6):672-3.

48. Eslamian L, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Mousavi N, Ghasemi A. The effects of various surface treatments on the shear bond strengths of stainless steel brackets to artificially-aged composite restorations. Aust Orthod J. 2011;27(1):28-32.

49. Eslamian L, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Mousavi N, Ghasemi A. A comparative study of shear bond strength between metal and ceramic brackets and artificially aged composite restorations using different surface treatments. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(5):610-7.

50. Al Shamsi A, Cunningham JL, Lamey PJ, Lynch E. Shear bond strength and residual adhesive after orthodontic bracket debonding. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):694-9.

51. Bishara SE, Ostby AW, Laffoon JF, Warren J. Shear bond strength comparison of two adhesive systems following thermocycling. A new self-etch primer and a resin-modified glass ionomer. Angle Orthod. 2007;77(2):337-41.

52. Zheng J, Huang Y, Qian LM, Zhou ZR. Nanomechanical properties and microtribological behaviours of human tooth enamel. Proc IMechE Part J J Eng Tribol. 2009;224:577–87.

53. He LH, Swain MV. Understanding the mechanical behaviour of human enamel from its structural and compositional characteristics. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2008;1(1):18-29.

54. The Oral Environment. In: Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM, editors. Craig's Restorative Dental Materials (Thirteenth Edition). Saint Louis: Mosby; 2012. p. 5-23.

55. Garg N, Garg A. Textbook of Operative Dentistry: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Pvt. Limited; 2015.

56. Restorative Materials—Composites and Polymers. In: Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM, editors. Craig's Restorative Dental Materials (Thirteenth Edition). Saint Louis: Mosby; 2012. p. 161-98.

57. Raisan N, Nahidh M. Bite raisers in orthodontics: a review. Mustansiria Dent J. 2023;18:318-36.

Gesama C, Khemaleelakun W, Sirabanchongkran S. Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations: Original articles. CM Dent J [Internet]. 2024 Apr 18 [cited 2024 Jul 15];45(1):47-57. Available from: https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=214

Gesama, C., Khemaleelakun, W. & Sirabanchongkran, S. (2024). Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations. CM Dent J, 45(1), 47-57. Retrieved from: https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=214

Gesama, C., Khemaleelakun Wikanda and Sirabanchongkran Supassara. 2024. "Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations." CM Dent J, 45(1), 47-57. https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=214

Gesama, C. et al. 2024. 'Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations', CM Dent J, 45(1), 47-57. Retrieved from https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=214

Gesama, C., Khemaleelakun, W. and Sirabanchongkran, S. "Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations", CM Dent J, vol.45, no. 1, pp. 47-57, Apr. 2024.

Gesama Chadamat, Khemaleelakun Wikanda, Sirabanchongkran Supassara "Comparison of the Shear Bond Strength of Compomer Bonding on Different Enamel Surface Preparations." CM Dent J, vol.45, no. 1, Apr. 2024, pp. 47-57, https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=214