AIM: The objective of the present study was to determine which of six bonding protocols yielded a clinically acceptable shear bond strength (SBS) of metal orthodontic brackets to CAD/CAM lithium disilicate porcelain restorations. A secondary aim was to determine which bonding protocol produced the least surface damage at debond. METHODS: Sixty lithium disilicate samples were fabricated to replicate the facial surface of a mandibular first molar using a CEREC CAD/CAM machine. The samples were split into six test groups, each of which received different mechanical/chemical pretreatment protocols to roughen the porcelain surface prior to bonding a molar orthodontic attachment. Shear bond strength testing was conducted using an Instron machine. The mean, maximum, minimal, and standard deviation SBS values for each sample group including an enamel control were calculated. A t-test was used to evaluate the statistical significance between the groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in SBS values, with the exception of surface roughening with a green stone prior to HFA and silane treatment. This protocol yielded slightly higher bond strength which was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Chemical treatment alone with HFA/silane yielded SBS values within an acceptable clinical range to withstand forces applied by orthodontic treatment and potentially eliminates the need to mechanically roughen the ceramic surface.
AIM: The objective of the present study was to determine which of six bonding protocols yielded a clinically acceptable shear bond strength (SBS) of metal orthodontic brackets to CAD/CAM lithium disilicate porcelain restorations. A secondary aim was to determine which bonding protocol produced the least surface damage at debond. METHODS: Sixty lithium disilicate samples were fabricated to replicate the facial surface of a mandibular first molar using a CEREC CAD/CAM machine. The samples were split into six test groups, each of which received different mechanical/chemical pretreatment protocols to roughen the porcelain surface prior to bonding a molar orthodontic attachment. Shear bond strength testing was conducted using an Instron machine. The mean, maximum, minimal, and standard deviation SBS values for each sample group including an enamel control were calculated. A t-test was used to evaluate the statistical significance between the groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in SBS values, with the exception of surface roughening with a green stone prior to HFA and silane treatment. This protocol yielded slightly higher bond strength which was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Chemical treatment alone with HFA/silane yielded SBS values within an acceptable clinical range to withstand forces applied by orthodontic treatment and potentially eliminates the need to mechanically roughen the ceramic surface.