Evaluation of mechanical properties of five cements for orthodontic band cementation

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the flexural, compressive and diametral tensile strengths of five cements used in orthodontics for band cementation. Twelve specimens of each cement were tested: 1 - GC Fuji Ortho Band (FJ), GC America Inc.; 2 - Meron (MR), Voco; 3 - Multi-Cure Glass Ion...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBrazilian oral research Vol. 27; no. 2; pp. 136 - 141
Main Authors Aguiar, Diego Andrei, Ritter, Daltro Enéas, Rocha, Roberto, Locks, Arno, Borgatto, Adriano Ferreti
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Brazil Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica - SBPqO 01.03.2013
Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the flexural, compressive and diametral tensile strengths of five cements used in orthodontics for band cementation. Twelve specimens of each cement were tested: 1 - GC Fuji Ortho Band (FJ), GC America Inc.; 2 - Meron (MR), Voco; 3 - Multi-Cure Glass Ionomer Band Cement (MC), 3M Unitek; 4 - Band-Lok (BL), Reliance Orthodontic Products; and 5 - Ketac Cem (KC), 3M ESPE. The results (mean) for diametral tensile strength were: 10.51 MPa (FJ), 9.60 MPa (MR), 20.04 MPa (MC), 42.80 MPa (BL), and 4.08 MPa (KC). The results for compressive strength were (in the same order): 64.50 MPa, 77.71 MPa, 94.21 MPa, 193.88 MPa, and 81.93 MPa. The results for flexural strength were (in the same order): 20.72 MPa, 25.84 MPa, 53.41 MPa, 137.41 MPa, and 20.50 MPa. The statistical analysis was performed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests with p-value £ 0.05. In terms of diametral tensile strength, BL showed the highest strength statistically, and MC, the second highest. In terms of compressive tensile strength, BL showed the highest strength statistically, and FJ did not attain the minimum recommended strength. In terms of flexural tensile strength, BL cement was superior to MC, and MR, FJ and KC were equivalent and inferior to BL and MC.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1807-3107
1806-8324
1807-3107
DOI:10.1590/S1806-83242013005000002