Flexural behavior of glass fiber reinforced composite wires with two monomer compositions compared to steel wire used as an orthodontic retainer

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanical properties of fiber reinforced composite (FRC) wires with different polymer matrices and compare them with steel wires commonly used in orthodontic retention. Eight groups of the FRC wires (continuous unidirectional E-glass) and a control group of steel metal Penta One 0.0215′′ were tested with a 3-point bending test. The FRC wire groups consisted of two thicknesses of fiber rovings (300-tex and 600-tex) which were impregnated with a light-curing monomer resin system of bis-GMA/PMMA or bis-Mepp/dimetacrylate/prosphoric ester monomer. The bending was continued until breakage of the specimen or to the strain of 3 mm using a span length of 10 mm and cross-head speed 1.00 mm/minute. The data were analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The maximum load values of the FRC wire groups varied between 1.3 and 20.0 N, and the control group was 2.4 N. Specimens of 600-tex groups had considerably higher load values than 300-tex groups. The load value of the control steel group was close to the load value of in the 300-tex groups. Bis-GMA/PMMA impregnated FRC demonstrated higher values of maximum load than bis-Mepp/dimethacrylate/prosphoric ester monomere resin impregnated FRC.

Keywords

FRC-wires orthodontic retainer

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bearn

D.R.

, Bonded orthodontic retainers: A review, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 108(2) (1995), 207–213.

Årtun

, Caries and periodontal reactions associated with long-term use of different type of bonded lingual retainers, Am. J. Orthod. 86 (1984), 112–118.

Zachrisson

B.U.

, Clinical experience with different bonded orthodontic retainers, Am. J. Orthod. 71 (1977), 440–448.

Årtun

Spadafora

A.T.

Shapiro

P.A.

McNeill

R.W.

and Chapko

M.K.

, Hygiene status associated with different types of bonded orthodontic canine to canine retainers, J. Clin. Periodontol. 14 (1987), 89–94.

Littlewood

S.J.

Millett

D.T.

Douleday

Bearn

D.R.

and Worthinton

H.V.

, Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces, Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 1 (2004), CD002283.

Zachrisson

B.U.

and Büyükyilmaz

, Bonding in orthodontics, in: Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques Graber

L.W.

, ed., 4th edn, Mosby, St. Louis, 2005, pp. 621–659.

Rose

Frucht

and Jonas

I.E.

, Clinical comparison of a multistranded wire and a direct-bonded polyethene ribbon-reinforced resin composite used for lingual retention, Quintessence Int. 33 (2002), 579–783.

Årtun

and Thylstrup

, Clinical and scanning electron microscopic study of surface changes of incipient caries lesion after debonding, Scan. J. Dent. Res. 94(3) (1986), 193–201.

Dahl

E.H.

and Zachrisson

B.U.

, Long term experience with direct bonded lingual retainers, J. Clin. Orthod. 25(10) (1991), 619–630.

10.

Årtun

Spadafora

A.T.

and Shapiro

P.A.

, A 3-year follow-up study of various types of orthodontic canine-to-canine retainers, Eur. J. Orthod. 19(5) (1997), 501–509.

11.

Tacken

P.E.

Cosyn

De Wilde

Aerts

Govaerts

and Vannet

B.V.

, Glass fibre reinforced versus multistranded bonded orthodontic retainers: A 2 years prospective multi-centre study, Eur. J. Orthod. 32(2) (2010), 117–123. doi:10.1093/ejo/cjp100.

12.

Foek

D.L.

Özcan

Krebs

and Sandham

, Adhesive properties of bonded orthodontic retainers to enamel: Stainless steel wire vs fibre-reinforced composites, J. Adhes. Dent. 11(5) (2009), 381–390.

13.

Sfondrini

M.F.

Fraticelli

Castellazzi

Scribante

and Gandini

, Clinical evaluation of bond failures and survival between mandibular canine-to-canine retainers made of flexible wire and fiber-reinforced composite, J. Clin. Exp. Dent. 6(2) (2014), 145–149. doi:10.4317/jced.51379.

14.

Bolla

Cozzani

Doldo

and Fontana

, Failure evaluation after a 6-year retention period: A comparison between glass fiber-reinforced (GFR) and multistranded bonded retainers, Int. Orthod. 10(1) (2012), 16–28. doi:10.1016/j.ortho.2011.12.005.

15.

Scribante

Cacciafesta

and Sfondrini

, Effect of various adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of fiber reinforced composite, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 130(2) (2006), 224–227.

16.

Raju

P.S.

Gupta

Grag

Bhattacharya

and Agarwal

D.K.

, Evaluation of shear bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite using different adhesive systems, J. Dr. NTR Univ. Health Sci. 1(4) (2012), 249–252. doi:10.4103/2277-8632.105117.

17.

Reynolds

I.R.

, A review of direct orthodontic bonding, Br. J. Orthodont. 2 (1979), 171–178.

18.

Lassila

L.V.J.

Nohrström

and Vallittu

P.K.

, The influence of short-term water storage on the flexural properties of unidirectional glass fiber-reinforced composite, Biomaterials 23(10) (2002), 2221–2229.

19.

Lassila

L.V.J.

and Vallittu

P.K.

, The effect of fiber position and polymerization condition on the flexural properties of fiber reinforced composite, J. Contempt. Dent. Pract. 5(2) (2004), 14–26.

20.

Dyer

S.R.

Lassila

L.V.J.

Jokinen

and Vallittu

P.K.

, Effect of fiber position and orientation on fracture load of fiber-reinforced composite, Dent. Mater. 20(10) (2004), 947–955.

21.

Bouillaguet

Schutt

Alander

Vallittu

P.K.

Schwaller

Buerki

Michler

Cattani-Lorente

and Krejci

, Hydrothermal and mechanical stresses degrade fiber-matrix interfacial bond strength in dental fiber-reinforced composites, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 76(1) (2006), 98–105.

22.

Vallittu

P.K.

, Effect of ten years of in vitro aging on the flexural properties of fiber-reinforced composites, Int. J. Prosthodont. 20(1) (2007), 43–45.

23.

Matinlinna

J.P.

Dahl

J.E.

Karlsson

Lassila

L.V.J.

and Vallittu

P.K.

, The effect of the novel silane system to the flexural properties of E-glass fiber reinforced composites for dental use, in: Silanes and Other Coupling Agents, Vol. 5, Koninklijke Brill NV, The Netherlands, 2009, pp. 107–121.