Bond Strength Efficiency of a High Fluoride and Calcium Release Self-adhesive Resin Cement: A Comparative In Vitro Study.

Aim: To clarify the bond strength of Theracem in comparison to other types of adhesive material, in addition to testing the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Material and Methods: A hundred extracted human premolars were collected for orthodontic purposes. Teeth were stored in 1% Chloramine-T trihydrate as bacteriostatic/bactericidal solution for one week; then, they were transmitted into distilled water. The buccal surface of the studied teeth was kept under surveillance and mounted in acrylic block. Siamese metal preadjusted premolar brackets were fixed on the buccal surface using three adhesive cements: Bisco ORTHO, GC Fuji ORTHO LC (Light Cure) and Theracem. The teeth were randomly divided into five groups of 20 specimens each. Group 1 (G1) used 37% phosphoric acid gel, Bisco primer, and Bisco adhesive. Group 2 (G2) used GC Fuji ORTHO LC (Light Cure) without etching. Group 3 (G3) used GC Fuji ORTHO LC (Light Cure) with etching. Group 4 (G4) used Theracem without etching. Group 5 (G5) used Theracem with etching. All the tested specimens were kept at 370°C in a distilled water bath for 24 h. Shear bond strength (SBS) was conducted using a universal microcomputer-controlled electronic test machine. Then, specimens' surfaces were assessed under a stereomicroscope with a 10× magnification to examine the orthodontics adhesive residue's buccal surface and scored using ARI. Results: The G4 exhibited the lowest mean bond strength value (M = 11.24, SD = 3.52), whereas G3 yielded the highest bond strength value (M = 25.02, SD = 3.41). The variance analysis revealed F = 61.71, indicating a significant difference among the bond strength values (P < .001). Tukey HSD post hoc testing demonstrated a significant difference in bond strength among groups, except G2 with G1 and G3. Kruskal-Wallis test showed statistically significant differences among all groups (P < .001). On comparison, the least adhesives that remained on the tooth surface were in G4 and G5. Conclusion: Theracem bonding system provides many advantages, as there is no need for an acid-etching step, it is easy to manipulate, and it provides a very suitable S.B.S. with no enamel detachment during debonding. Also, scores 0 and 1 in the ARI test lead to a decrease in enamel damage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]