Influence of bioactive varnish on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

To evaluate the effect of bioactive varnish application on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to demineralized enamel. Bovine incisors were selected and randomly assigned to four groups based on enamel treatment: Group 1 - sound enamel, no treatment (positive control); Group 2 - enamel subjected to a pH-cycling demineralization protocol (negative control); Group 3 - demineralized enamel treated with bioactive varnish (PRG Barrier Coat®, Shofu) and stored in distilled water for 24 h; and Group 4 - demineralized enamel treated with the same varnish and stored in distilled water for 28 days. For SBS and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) tests (n = 15 per group), orthodontic brackets (Roth Max® slot 22, Morelli) were bonded to the enamel using the Transbond XT® adhesive system (3 M Solventum). Samples underwent thermocycling (500 cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C), followed by SBS testing using a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min) and ARI evaluation using stereomicroscopy. Enamel surfaces from each group (n = 3 per group) were also examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). SBS data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Dunn's post hoc test. ARI scores were analyzed using Fisher's exact test, with significance set at 5%. The positive control group showed significantly higher SBS values compared to Groups 3 and 4 (p < 0.001). The negative control group showed intermediate values, with no significant differences from the other groups. A significant association was found between groups and ARI scores: in the positive control group, 53.3% of samples had ARI = 0 and 33.3% had ARI = 3; in the negative control group, 93.3% had ARI = 0. In Groups 3 and 4, 100% of the samples showed ARI = 0. SEM analysis revealed an intact surface in the positive control group, a porous surface in the negative control, and a varnish-covered surface in Groups 3 and 4, with Group 3 exhibiting a more homogeneous coating than Group 4. Conclusion: The application of bioactive varnish to demineralized enamel significantly reduced bracket bond strength and resulted in predominantly adhesive failures at the enamel interface. Clinically, this suggests that bonding orthodontic brackets directly to enamel treated with this bioactive varnish may compromise bond integrity, regardless of the waiting period after application.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Saudi Dental Journal
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-025-00075-2
Primary Topic
Dental materials and restorations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Influence of bioactive varnish on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

Natanael Barbosa dos Santos, M. V. N. DE OLIVEIRA, Carlos Augusto de Lima Vaz da Silva, José Marcos dos Santos Oliveira et al.
The Saudi Dental Journal
Dental materials and restorations
article

Influence of bioactive varnish on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

Natanael Barbosa dos Santos, M. V. N. DE OLIVEIRA, Carlos Augusto de Lima Vaz da Silva, José Marcos dos Santos Oliveira, Jeniffer Mclaine Duarte de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Bomfim da Silva, Flávia Lucisano Botelho do Amaral
article en

Abstract

To evaluate the effect of bioactive varnish application on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to demineralized enamel. Bovine incisors were selected and randomly assigned to four groups based on enamel treatment: Group 1 - sound enamel, no treatment (positive control); Group 2 - enamel subjected to a pH-cycling demineralization protocol (negative control); Group 3 - demineralized enamel treated with bioactive varnish (PRG Barrier Coat®, Shofu) and stored in distilled water for 24 h; and Group 4 - demineralized enamel treated with the same varnish and stored in distilled water for 28 days. For SBS and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) tests (n = 15 per group), orthodontic brackets (Roth Max® slot 22, Morelli) were bonded to the enamel using the Transbond XT® adhesive system (3 M Solventum). Samples underwent thermocycling (500 cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C), followed by SBS testing using a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min) and ARI evaluation using stereomicroscopy. Enamel surfaces from each group (n = 3 per group) were also examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). SBS data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Dunn's post hoc test. ARI scores were analyzed using Fisher's exact test, with significance set at 5%. The positive control group showed significantly higher SBS values compared to Groups 3 and 4 (p < 0.001). The negative control group showed intermediate values, with no significant differences from the other groups. A significant association was found between groups and ARI scores: in the positive control group, 53.3% of samples had ARI = 0 and 33.3% had ARI = 3; in the negative control group, 93.3% had ARI = 0. In Groups 3 and 4, 100% of the samples showed ARI = 0. SEM analysis revealed an intact surface in the positive control group, a porous surface in the negative control, and a varnish-covered surface in Groups 3 and 4, with Group 3 exhibiting a more homogeneous coating than Group 4. Conclusion: The application of bioactive varnish to demineralized enamel significantly reduced bracket bond strength and resulted in predominantly adhesive failures at the enamel interface. Clinically, this suggests that bonding orthodontic brackets directly to enamel treated with this bioactive varnish may compromise bond integrity, regardless of the waiting period after application.

The Saudi Dental JournalVol. 37(7-9)
Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (BR), Centro Universitário Cesmac (BR), Universidade Federal de Alagoas (BR)
Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Instituto Federal de Alagoas, Ministério da Educação
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Dental materials and restorations
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.