Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36540003›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2022

Comparison of Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Onto the Tooth Enamel of 120 Freshly Extracted Adult Bovine Medial Lower Incisors Using 4 Adhesives: A Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Adhesive, a Composite Adhesive, a Liquid Composite Adhesive, and a One-Step Light-Cured Adhesive.

Agata Prylińska-Czyżewska, Zofia Maciejewska-Szaniec, Aneta Olszewska, Marta Polichnowska, Beniamin Oskar Grabarek, Damian Dudek, Dawid Sobański, Agata Czajka-Jakubowska

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparative in vitro study of bond strength of two-step orthodontic bonding systems : Self-adhesive composite vs. self-etching primer.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Agata Prylińska-CzyżewskaDepartment of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular Disorders, University of Medical Sciences in Poznań, Poznań, Poland.
Zofia Maciejewska-SzaniecDepartment of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular Disorders, University of Medical Sciences in Poznań, Poznań, Poland.
Aneta OlszewskaDepartment of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular Disorders, University of Medical Sciences in Poznań, Poznań, Poland.
Marta PolichnowskaPostgraduate School of Research Methodology, University of Medical Sciences in Poznań, Poznań, Poland.
Beniamin Oskar GrabarekDepartment of Histology, Cytophysiology and Embryology, Academy of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Damian DudekArtmedical Oral Surgery, Toruń, Poland.
Dawid SobańskiDepartment of Histology, Cytophysiology and Embryology, Academy of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Agata Czajka-JakubowskaDepartment of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular Disorders, University of Medical Sciences in Poznań, Poznań, Poland.
Poznan University of Medical Sciences · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND This study aimed to compare the bond strength of orthodontic brackets onto the tooth enamel of 120 freshly extracted adult bovine medial lower incisors using 4 adhesives: a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive, a composite adhesive, a liquid composite adhesive, and a one-step light-cured adhesive. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study group (120 freshly extracted bovine medial lower incisors) was divided into equal subgroups depending on the type of adhesive used to fix the brackets to the tooth enamel (n=30), and then according to the observation time (n=10). Orthodontic brackets were fixed onto the tooth enamel for 24 hours (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3) using 4 types of adhesives: resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive Fuji Ortho LC, composite adhesive Transbond Plus Light Cure Band, flowable composite adhesive Transbond Supreme Low Viscosity, and a one-step light-cured adhesive GC Ortho Connect. Shear tests and fracture plane analyses were performed. RESULTS Statistically significant differences at time T1 were noted in the comparison of shear stress values when brackets were fixed with GC Ortho Connect adhesive compared to other adhesives (P<0.05), except for the Transbond Plus adhesive (P>0.05). At time T3, significant statistical differences occurred between GC Fuji Ortho LC and the other 3 adhesives (P<0.05). The fracture analysis showed that, regardless of the time function, adhesive-cohesive fractures without damage to the enamel were the most common for all the assessed materials. CONCLUSIONS Of the adhesives evaluated, GC Ortho Connect appears to be the most appropriate choice for bonding orthodontic brackets to the enamel surface.

Indexed as

Dental BondingOrthodontic BracketsAcrylic ResinsAdhesivesAluminum SilicatesAnimalsBisphenol A-Glycidyl MethacrylateCattleDental EnamelGlass Ionomer CementsIncisorMaterials TestingResin CementsShear StrengthSilicon DioxideAcrylic ResinsAdhesivesAluminum SilicatesBisphenol A-Glycidyl MethacrylateFuji Ortho LCglass ionomerGlass Ionomer CementsResin CementsSilicon DioxideTransbond

Identifiers

PMID36540003
PMCPMC9791911
OpenAlexW4312079949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.