Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Lingual Retainer Wires Bonded with Three Different Lingual Retainer Composites: An In Vitro Study

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate microleakage when two types of retainer wires were bonded with two light cured and a self cured lingual retainer composites. Materials and Methods: Total 120 freshly extracted human mandibular incisor teeth were collected and separated into six subgroups of 20 teeth each. Two different wires, a 0.036 inch hard round stainless steel (HRSS) wire sandblasted at the ends and 0.0175 inch multistranded wire bonded onto the lingual surfaces of the incisors with three different types of composite resins of 3M company; Concise Orthodontic (self-cure), Transbond XT (lightcure) and Transbond LR (light-cure). Specimens were further sealed with a nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic fuchsine for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for microleakage for the enamel-composite and wire-composite interfaces. Statistical analysis was performed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Results: For HRSS wire, at the enamel-composite interface, the microleakage was least with Transbond LR followed by Concise Orthodontic and greatest for Transbond XT (p<0.05). At the wire composite interface too, the microleakage was in order of Transbond LR<Concise Orthodontic<Transbond XT. For the multistranded wire, at the enamel-composite interface, the microleakage was least with Transbond LR followed by Concise Orthodontic and Transbond XT (p<0.05). At the wire composite interface too, it was seen that microleakage was the least with Transbond LR followed by Concise Orthodontic and Transbond XT. Conclusion: Transbond LR in combination with 0.0175 inch multistranded wire showed least microleakage amongst the groups studied.

Keywords

• lingual retainer
• microleakage
• orthodontic composites