Literature DB >> 2144942

Bond strength of ceramic brackets under shear stress: an in vitro report.

A D Viazis1, G Cavanaugh, R R Bevis.   

Abstract

The shear bond strength and the potential enamel damage on debonding of various currently available ceramic and stainless steel brackets were examined in vitro using extracted premolar teeth. The brackets were divided into two groups, one bonded with a new light-cured orthodontic adhesive and the other with a conventional chemically cured system. An Instron Universal testing machine was used to apply the shear stress. Mean, standard deviation, and extreme values were calculated for each group. Statistical analysis showed that the mean shear bond strength of the silane chemical bond provided by some ceramic brackets is significantly higher (p less than 0.05) than the mean of the mechanical bond of other ceramic and stainless steel brackets. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean shear bond strength of the two adhesives used. Mechanical bonds failed primarily within the adhesive itself, whereas chemical bonds failed predominantly at the adhesive-bracket interface. Single-crystal ceramic brackets tend to be more brittle than the polycrystalline ones. Strong chemical bonds can potentially lead to enamel failure on debonding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2144942     DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81598-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of shear bond strength of plastic and ceramic brackets.

Authors:  V Zielinski; S Reimann; A Jäger; C Bourauel
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Reconditioning of ceramic orthodontic brackets with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser.

Authors:  Farzaneh Ahrari; Reza Fekrazad; Katayoun A M Kalhori; Mahshid Ramtin
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 3.161

3.  Shear Bond Strength of Ceramic Brackets with Different Base Designs: Comparative In-vitro Study.

Authors:  Mohd Younus Ansari; Deepak K Agarwal; Ankur Gupta; Preeti Bhattacharya; Juhi Ansar; Ravi Bhandari
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-11-01

4.  Shear bond strength and enamel fracture behavior of ceramic brackets Fascination® and Fascination®2.

Authors:  Robert Gittner; Ralf Müller-Hartwich; Sylvia Engel; Paul-Georg Jost-Brinkmann
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2012-01-15       Impact factor: 1.938

5.  Effect of Er:YAG Laser and Sandblasting in Recycling of Ceramic Brackets.

Authors:  Soghra Yassaei; Hossein Aghili; Azadeh Hosseinzadeh Firouzabadi; Hamidreza Meshkani
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2017-01-08

6.  Does ultra-pulse CO(2) laser reduce the risk of enamel damage during debonding of ceramic brackets?

Authors:  Farzaneh Ahrari; Farzin Heravi; Reza Fekrazad; Fahimeh Farzanegan; Samaneh Nakhaei
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2011-06-11       Impact factor: 3.161

7.  Quantitative analysis of mechanically retentive ceramic bracket base surfaces with a three-dimensional imaging system.

Authors:  Da-Young Kang; Sung-Hwan Choi; Jung-Yul Cha; Chung-Ju Hwang
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 8.  Iatrogenic possibilities of orthodontic treatment and modalities of prevention.

Authors:  Nazeer Ahmed Meeran
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2013-07

9.  Effect of the different debonding strength of metal and ceramic brackets on the degree of enamel microcrack healing.

Authors:  Piyaphong Nimplod; Ratchawan Tansalarak; Tanapon Sornsuwan
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2021-06-25

10.  Evaluation of stresses developed in different bracket-cement-enamel systems using finite element analysis with in vitro bond strength tests.

Authors:  Shaymaa E Elsaka; Shaza M Hammad; Noha F Ibrahim
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 2.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.