The current evidence suggests no difference between the types of material s after 12 months but favours composite resin adhesives after a > 14-month period .
The clinical relevance of this study is that RM-GIC may have the same clinical debonding ( failure ) rate as composite resin adhesives after 1 year when used for bonding of orthodontic brackets
The aim of this systematic review was to establish whether the clinical debonding ( failure ) rates of orthodontic brackets bonded either with resin-modified glass ionomer ( RM-GIC ) or with composite resin adhesive  are the same .
Comparison of bracket debonding force between two conventional resin adhesives and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: an in vitro and in vivo study.
The purpose of this study was to compare the debonding force of orthodontic brackets bonded with two conventional resin adhesives ( Resilience L3 and Light Bond ) and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement ( Fuji Ortho LC ) . For the in vitro part of the study , 80 extracted premolars were r and omly divided into four groups . In groups A and B , brackets were bonded to unetched enamel using Fuji Ortho LC cement in wet and dry conditions , respectively . In groups C and D , brackets were bonded to etched enamel using Resilience L3 and Light Bond , respectively .  Debonding force was determined using a servohydraulic testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min . Data was analyzed using the ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison test at p<0.05 . A significant difference was found in debonding force between unetched Fuji Ortho LC and the two conventional resins . There was no significant difference between the two conventional resins or between unetched resin-reinforced glass ionomer in the wet and dry conditions . For the in vivo part of the study , 30 patients were r and omly assigned to one of the three bonding material groups . Bracket survival rates and distributions were obtained by following these patients for 1.2 years . Data was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimates of survivorship function . Bond failure interface was determined using a modified adhesive remnant index ( ARI ) . These results showed no significant difference between survival rates and distributions among the three bonding material s with respect to the type of malocclusion , type of orthodontic treatment , or location of bracket . There were significant differences between survival distributions of males and females in the unetched Fuji Ortho LC group and among type of teeth in the conventional resin groups . The predominant mode of bracket failure for the unetched Fuji Ortho LC cement was at the enamel-adhesive interface , and for conventional resins , the enamel-adhesive interface and the bracket-adhesive interface . These results suggest that resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement can withst and occlusal and orthodontic forces despite having a bond strength lower than that of conventional resin adhesives
The current evidence suggests no difference between the types of material s after 12 months but favours composite resin adhesives after a > 14-month period .
The clinical relevance of this study is that RM-GIC may have the same clinical debonding ( failure ) rate as composite resin adhesives after 1 year when used for bonding of orthodontic brackets
The aim of this systematic review was to establish whether the clinical debonding ( failure ) rates of orthodontic brackets bonded either with resin-modified glass ionomer ( RM-GIC ) or with composite resin adhesive  are the same .