Failure of orthodontic bonded attachments and brackets is mostly attributed
to contamination of the enamel surface. To overcome this problem, material
s have been developed that purportedly overcome the moisture and contaminan
ts present in the oral environment. This study compared the shear bond stre
ngths of 2 light-cured hydrophilic bonding systems, Transbond XT with MIP (
3M/Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and Assure (Reliance Orthodontics, Itasca, III)
with a hydrophobic bonding system, Transbond XT with XT primer (3M/Unitek)
. Comparison tests were conducted under 4 enamel surface conditions: (I) et
ched and dried; (2) etched and moistened with artificial saliva; (3) etched
, primed, and moistened with artificial saliva; and (4) etched, primed, moi
stened with artificial saliva, and reprimed. In addition, an adhesive remna
nt index score was used to determine the amount of adhesive remaining on th
e tooth. Stainless steel brackets with mesh-backed pads (n = 144) were bond
ed to bovine teeth. Bond strength was then tested in shear using an Instron
mechanical testing instrument. There were significant differences in the b
ond strengths among the products (P < .05), within surface treatments (P <
.05), and among the different bonding materials in combination with various
surface treatments (P < .05). Treatments 1 and 4 showed the highest mean b
ond strengths adhesive remnant index scores, whereas treatments 2 and 3 sho
wed the lowest mean bond strengths and scores.