ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2025
Comparative evaluation of bonding failure rate with two light cure orthodontic adhesives: a cross-arch split-mouth prospective study.
Article in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContinuous improvements in the field of adhesive dentistry have led to the introduction of various materials that have the potential to be used as orthodontic adhesives. One such light-cure orthodontic adhesive is the U-Bond™ Ortho, which clinically exhibits optimum bonding strength.
objectiveThe aim of this cross-arch split-mouth prospective study was to evaluate the bonding failure rate along with the bracket survival time of U-Bond™ Ortho as compared with Transbond™ XT adhesive material, over an observation period of six months. MATERIAL AND
methods36 consecutive patients (16 males and 20 females; mean age 22.44 years) fulfilling the selection criteria were included in the study. A total of 720 brackets were bonded equally using Transbond™ XT and U-Bond™ adhesive, which were analyzed for bracket failure rate, using the Chi-square test or Fischer test, and mean bracket survival time using Kaplan-Meier analysis.
resultsThe overall bracket failure rate was 3.6% (2.8% and 4.4% for Transbond™ XT and U-Bond™ respectively). The results were statistically non-significant when both adhesive materials were compared for differences in bonding failure rate and mean bracket survival time in the maxillary and mandibular arches, and anterior and posterior segments, although gender-based differences were statistically significant.
conclusionBoth Transbond™ XT and U-Bond™ Ortho exhibited similar clinically acceptable performances in terms of bonding failure rate and bracket survival time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.