OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of femtosecond laser treatment (Group FS) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of a metal bracket to prepared porcelain surface, and to compare it with other surface treatment techniques [50 μm Al2O3 sandblasting (Group SB), 9.6% hydrofluoric acid gel (Group HF), and neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Nd:YAG laser) (Group NY)]. BACKGROUND DATA: Because of the increasing number of adult patients in current orthodontic practice, achieving sufficient bond strength of composite resin to porcelain restorations without bond failure during the treatment is a challenge for orthodontists. METHODS: In total, 80 glazed feldspathic porcelain samples were prepared and randomly assigned to four groups of 20. Treated surfaces were treated with a silane agent. Brackets were bonded to porcelain samples. The specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 h and then thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5° and 55°C. The SBS of the brackets was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, until bonding failure occurred. The data were analyzed statistically using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tamhane multiple comparisons tests. The results of ANOVA indicated that the SBS values varied according to the surface treatment method (p<0.001). RESULTS: Results of the Tamhane post-hoc tests indicated that the bond strength in Group NY (5.11±1.53) was significantly lower than the other groups (p<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences among Groups SB (9.07±3.76), HF (9.09±3.51), and FS (11.58±4.16) (p=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed that FS treatment produced high SBS of the processes assessed; therefore, it appears to be an effective method for bonding orthodontic metal brackets to prepared porcelain surfaces.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of femtosecond laser treatment (Group FS) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of a metal bracket to prepared porcelain surface, and to compare it with other surface treatment techniques [50 μm Al2O3 sandblasting (Group SB), 9.6% hydrofluoric acid gel (Group HF), and neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Nd:YAG laser) (Group NY)]. BACKGROUND DATA: Because of the increasing number of adult patients in current orthodontic practice, achieving sufficient bond strength of composite resin to porcelain restorations without bond failure during the treatment is a challenge for orthodontists. METHODS: In total, 80 glazed feldspathic porcelain samples were prepared and randomly assigned to four groups of 20. Treated surfaces were treated with a silane agent. Brackets were bonded to porcelain samples. The specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 h and then thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5° and 55°C. The SBS of the brackets was tested with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, until bonding failure occurred. The data were analyzed statistically using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tamhane multiple comparisons tests. The results of ANOVA indicated that the SBS values varied according to the surface treatment method (p<0.001). RESULTS: Results of the Tamhane post-hoc tests indicated that the bond strength in Group NY (5.11±1.53) was significantly lower than the other groups (p<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences among Groups SB (9.07±3.76), HF (9.09±3.51), and FS (11.58±4.16) (p=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed that FS treatment produced high SBS of the processes assessed; therefore, it appears to be an effective method for bonding orthodontic metal brackets to prepared porcelain surfaces.
Authors: María Vicente Prieto; Ana Luisa Caseiro Gomes; Javier Montero Martín; Alfonso Alvarado Lorenzo; Vicente Seoane Mato; Alberto Albaladejo Martínez Journal: J Lasers Med Sci Date: 2016-10-27
Authors: Verónica García-Sanz; Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo; Carlos Bellot-Arcís; Omel Mendoza-Yero; Carlos Doñate-Buendía; Javier Montero; Alberto Albaladejo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-19 Impact factor: 3.240