Comparison of a 3-step Bonding System (Transbond™ XT) and a 2-step System (GC Ortho Connect™) on Demineralization Around Maxillary Orthodontic Brackets (ORTHOCOLLAGE)

January 12, 2026 updated by: University Hospital, Montpellier

Comparison of a 3-step Bonding System (TRANSBOND™ XT) Versus a 2-step System (GC ORTHO CONNECT™) on Demineralization Around Maxillary Orthodontic Brackets: a Randomized Split-mouth Clinical Trial.

White spot lesions (WSLs) are one of the most common adverse effects of fixed orthodontic treatments, affecting up to 97% of patients treated with labial appliances. These early enamel demineralizations, caused by microleakage between enamel and adhesive, can appear as early as the fourth week of treatment. They not only pose aesthetic concerns but also increase the risk of bracket failure.

This randomized split-mouth clinical trial compares two bonding systems : the traditional three-step system (Transbond™ XT) and the simplified two-step system (GC Ortho Connect™) to assess their impact on enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets. The degree of demineralization will be measured using the Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) based on intraoral photographs and confirmed with a fluorescence camera (C50 Acteon).

The aim of the study is to determine whether the simplified bonding protocol can reduce clinical time and saliva contamination risk without increasing enamel demineralization, thus offering a potentially more efficient and conservative approach for orthodontic bonding procedures.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Introduction:

White spot lesions (WSLs) (localized, non-cavitated enamel demineralizations) represent one of the most frequent side effects of fixed orthodontic treatments. Clinically visible in up to 97% of patients undergoing labial orthodontic therapy, these lesions can emerge as early as the fourth week of treatment. They result from microleakage at the adhesive enamel interface, which facilitates bacterial colonization and acid production. Beyond their aesthetic impact, WSLs can compromise bracket adhesion and increase the risk of failure

Fixed orthodontic appliances modify the oral ecosystem, favoring plaque accumulation and hindering efficient brushing, particularly around complex elements such as ligatures, brackets, and springs. Consequently, WSLs constitute a significant clinical concern for both orthodontists and dental surgeons, as these lesions can persist five years after treatment completion.

Bonding Systems Under Investigation :

The conventional bonding protocol, Transbond™ XT, involves three steps: etching, primer application, and adhesive placement. Conversely, the GC Ortho Connect™ system integrates the primer directly into the adhesive, simplifying the bonding procedure to a single step following orthophosphoric acid etching. This reduced protocol minimizes saliva exposure time and enhances bonding strength.

Furthermore, GC Ortho Connect™ contains functional monomers such as 10-MDP (10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate), which chemically interacts with hydroxyapatite, forming a stable bond resistant to moisture. While some studies suggest this system reduces the risk of contamination and shortens chairside time, others report slightly deeper and larger lesions compared to the conventional three-step approach. Evidence remains contradictory, with several in vitro studies showing no significant difference in enamel quality between the two bonding systems.

Research Hypothesis and Objectives :

This clinical trial aims to determine whether a significant difference exists in enamel demineralization between a three-step (Transbond™ XT) and a two-step (GC Ortho Connect™) bonding system.

- Primary Objective: Compare the degree of enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets at debonding between the two systems using intraoral photographs (Enamel Decalcification Index, EDI) and fluorescence imaging (C50 Acteon camera).

  • Secondary Objectives:
  • Assess enamel demineralization before bonding, at 6 months, and at 12 months.
  • Compare bracket failure rates throughout treatment.
  • Evaluate plaque accumulation using the Silness and Löe plaque index.

Methodology :

A monocentric randomized split-mouth trial will be conducted at the Montpellier Dental Care Center. Each patient will serve as their own control:

One hemi-arch (control) bonded with Transbond™ XT (3-step system).

The opposite hemi-arch (experimental) bonded with GC Ortho Connect™ (2-step system).

Randomization will be stratified by gender and brushing hand dominance to reduce confounding factors. Inclusion criteria target minors aged 10-16 years requiring fixed labial metallic appliances.

The split-mouth design minimizes interindividual variability (e.g., enamel quality, saliva composition, hygiene habits) and increases statistical power. Additionally, enamel demineralization assessment will be conducted by a blinded examiner to ensure unbiased evaluation.

Conclusion :

This study proposes an innovative clinical comparison between two orthodontic bonding systems to assess their effects on enamel demineralization. If the simplified GC Ortho Connect™ system demonstrates similar or superior outcomes to the conventional Transbond™ XT, it could represent a time-saving, contamination-resistant, and more conservative alternative for orthodontic bonding procedures ultimately improving patient safety and clinical efficiency.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

34

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patient aged 10 to 16 years included,
  • Patient attending their first dentofacial orthopedics consultation at the Montpellier Dental Care Center, in adolescent or young adult dentition (according to Démogé classification),
  • Patient requiring the placement of a bimaxillary multi-bracket treatment and opting for a metallic vestibular technique.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Syndromic patient (all syndromes included, e.g., cleft lip) or with a severe long-term condition (ALD),
  • Patient previously treated with a multi-bracket orthodontic treatment using a mixed, lingual, or vestibular technique,
  • Any medical condition deemed incompatible with bracket placement by the investigator,
  • Patient with severe MIH (molar-incisor hypomineralization) and/or severe demineralization on one or more teeth (including severe amelogenesis imperfecta or dentinogenesis imperfecta),
  • Patient with restorations such as metal crowns, ceramic crowns, porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns, inlays, onlays, or amalgam on one or more vestibular surfaces,
  • Patient with oral hygiene incompatible with orthodontic treatment,
  • Agenesis of lateral incisors,
  • Subject already participating in another interventional clinical trial that could interfere with this study,
  • Uncontrolled psychiatric disorder,
  • Lack of written informed consent from a legal representative after a reflection period,
  • Lack of cooperation or difficulty in communication/comprehension, or refusal of participation by the minor,
  • Subject with a dependency or employment relationship with the sponsor or investigator,
  • Subject participating in another research study with an ongoing exclusion period,
  • Subject not affiliated with the French social security system or not a beneficiary of such a system,
  • Protected populations according to the French Public Health Code:

Pregnant or breastfeeding women Subjects deprived of liberty (by judicial, administrative decision, or involuntary hospitalization) Subjects under guardianship or curatorship

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Transbond™ XT (3-step system)
Conventional 3-step bonding system applied on one hemi-arch: acid etching, primer application, adhesive placement, and light curing. Serves as control.
Brackets are bonded to one hemi-arch using the 3-step protocol: 1) acid etching, 2) primer application, 3) adhesive placement and light curing.
Experimental: GC Ortho Connect™ (2-step system)
Simplified 2-step bonding system applied on contralateral hemi-arch: acid etching followed by adhesive with integrated primer and light curing. Evaluates potential reduction in enamel demineralization.
Brackets are bonded to the contralateral hemi-arch using the 2-step protocol: 1) acid etching, 2) adhesive with integrated primer, followed by light curing.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Mean Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) after Debonding
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Mean Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) per maxillary hemi-arch after debonding of fixed orthodontic appliances. The assessment will be performed using intraoral photographs, based on the 0-3 scoring system of the Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) by Banks & Richmond, 1994, evaluating white spot lesions (WSLs) around maxillary metallic orthodontic brackets (AO groove .022 x .028). Results will be confirmed using a fluorescence intraoral camera.
Up to 24 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Mean EDI per Hemi-Arch
Time Frame: Preprocedural
Mean Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) per maxillary hemi-arch, using intraoral photographs and fluorescence intraoral camera, to the 0-3 scoring system of the Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) by Banks & Richmond, 1994.
Preprocedural
Mean EDI per Hemi-Arch
Time Frame: 6 months
Mean Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) per maxillary hemi-arch, using intraoral photographs and fluorescence intraoral camera, to the 0-3 scoring system of the Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) by Banks & Richmond, 1994.
6 months
Mean EDI per Hemi-Arch
Time Frame: 12 months
Mean Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) per maxillary hemi-arch, using intraoral photographs and fluorescence intraoral camera, to the 0-3 scoring system of the Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) by Banks & Richmond, 1994.
12 months
EDI per Tooth
Time Frame: Preprocedural
Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) measured per tooth, according to the 0-3 EDI scoring system.
Preprocedural
EDI per Tooth
Time Frame: 6 months
Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) measured per tooth, according to the 0-3 EDI scoring system.
6 months
EDI per Tooth
Time Frame: 12 months
Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) measured per tooth, according to the 0-3 EDI scoring system.
12 months
EDI per Tooth
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI) measured per tooth, according to the 0-3 EDI scoring system.
Up to 24 months
Occurrence of bracket Detachment per tooth
Time Frame: 6 months
6 months
Occurrence of bracket Detachment per tooth
Time Frame: 12 months
12 months
Occurrence of bracket Detachment per tooth
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Up to 24 months
Total number of detachments per tooth
Time Frame: 6 months
6 months
Total number of detachments per tooth
Time Frame: 12 months
12 months
Total number of detachments per tooth
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Up to 24 months
Total number of detachments per patient
Time Frame: 6 months
6 months
Total number of detachments per patient
Time Frame: 12 months
12 months
Total number of detachments per patient
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Up to 24 months
Plaque Index
Time Frame: Preprocedural
Plaque Index scored 0-3 according to Silness & Loe, measured with a probe N°6
Preprocedural
Plaque Index
Time Frame: 6 months
Plaque Index scored 0-3 according to Silness & Loe, measured with a probe N°6
6 months
Plaque Index
Time Frame: 12 months
Plaque Index scored 0-3 according to Silness & Loe, measured with a probe N°6
12 months
Plaque Index
Time Frame: Up to 24 months
Plaque Index scored 0-3 according to Silness & Loe, measured with a probe N°6
Up to 24 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Stéphane BARTHELEMI, PU-PH, University Hospital, Montpellier

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

January 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

April 1, 2028

Study Completion (Estimated)

April 1, 2028

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 10, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 12, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

January 21, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 21, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 12, 2026

Last Verified

January 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Tooth Demineralization

Clinical Trials on Transbond™ XT bonding procedure

Subscribe