JLE

L'Orthodontie Française

MENU

Comparative study of excess glue around metallic APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system Volume 93, issue 3, Septembre 2022

Figures


  • Figure 1

  • Figure 2

  • Figure 3

  • Figure 4

  • Figure 5

  • Figure 6

  • Figure 7

  • Figure 8

  • Figure 9

  • Figure 10

Tables

Authors
1 Département d’Orthodontie, Faculté de Médecine Dentaire, Université Saint-Joseph, 650 rue de Damas, B.P. 11-5076 Riad El Solh, Beyrouth, Liban
2 Service d’ODF, Hôpital de la Timone, 264 rue Saint-Pierre, 13005 Marseille, France
* Correspondance : joseph.ghoubril@usj.edu.lb

Introduction

The aim of this in vitro study was to determine if there is a significant difference in the excess adhesive flash between the metallic APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system, the APC™ pre-coated adhesive system and a conventional uncoated system.

Materials and Methods

One hundred eighty-six freshly extracted human premolars were randomly and blindly divided into three groups according to the type of brackets. Group A (control group n=60): The conventional uncoated metallic bracket (Victory, 3M Unitek®) with a Transbond XT™ Light Cure Adhesive Paste was used. Group B (n=60): The APC™ II metallic maxillary precoated premolar brackets was used. Group C (n=66) : The metallic APC™ Flash-Free adhesive system without flash clean up was used. Images were taken at 40 magnifications in a dental microscope (Leica M320 for dental, Wetzlar, Germany) then analyzed with the ImageJ software and the area of excess adhesive flash was measured.

Results

The mean percentage was significantly different between the three groups (p<0.001; ANOVA). It was significantly smaller for brackets in the APC Flash-Free group (p<0.001), and the difference was not significant between conventional brackets and APC (p=0.224).

Discussion

The new technique seems to reduce the amount of excessive adhesive around orthodontic brackets.