OBJECTIVE: To investigate the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic metal brackets applied to different types of ceramic surfaces treated with different etching procedures and bonding agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Monolithic CAD/CAM ceramic specimens (N = 120; n = 40 each group) of feldspathic ceramic Vita Mark II, resin nanoceramic Lava Ultimate, and hybrid ceramic Vita Enamic were fabricated (14 × 12 × 3 mm). Ceramic specimens were separated into four subgroups (n = 10) according to type of surface treatment and bonding onto the ceramic surface. Within each group, four subgroups were prepared by phosphoric acid, hydrofluoric acid, Transbond XT primer, and Clearfill Ceramic primer. Mandibular central incisor metal brackets were bonded with light-cure composite. The SBS data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD tests. RESULTS: The highest SBS was found in the Vita Enamic group, which is a hybrid ceramic, etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Transbond XT Adhesive primer (7.28 ± 2.49 MPa). The lowest SBS was found in the Lava Ultimate group, which is a resin nano-ceramic etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Clearfill ceramic primer (2.20 ± 1.21 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: CAD/CAM material types and bonding procedures affected bond strength ( P < .05), but the etching procedure did not ( P > .05). The use of Transbond XT as a primer bonding agent resulted in higher SBS.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic metal brackets applied to different types of ceramic surfaces treated with different etching procedures and bonding agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Monolithic CAD/CAM ceramic specimens (N = 120; n = 40 each group) of feldspathic ceramic Vita Mark II, resin nanoceramic Lava Ultimate, and hybrid ceramic Vita Enamic were fabricated (14 × 12 × 3 mm). Ceramic specimens were separated into four subgroups (n = 10) according to type of surface treatment and bonding onto the ceramic surface. Within each group, four subgroups were prepared by phosphoric acid, hydrofluoric acid, Transbond XT primer, and Clearfill Ceramic primer. Mandibular central incisor metal brackets were bonded with light-cure composite. The SBS data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD tests. RESULTS: The highest SBS was found in the Vita Enamic group, which is a hybrid ceramic, etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Transbond XT Adhesive primer (7.28 ± 2.49 MPa). The lowest SBS was found in the Lava Ultimate group, which is a resin nano-ceramic etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Clearfill ceramic primer (2.20 ± 1.21 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: CAD/CAM material types and bonding procedures affected bond strength ( P < .05), but the etching procedure did not ( P > .05). The use of Transbond XT as a primer bonding agent resulted in higher SBS.
Entities:
Keywords:
CAD; CAM ceramic material; Orthodontic metal brackets; Shear bond strength; Surface treatment
Authors: Lucas Hian da Silva; Erick de Lima; Ranulfo Benedito de Paula Miranda; Stéphanie Soares Favero; Ulrich Lohbauer; Paulo Francisco Cesar Journal: Braz Oral Res Date: 2017-08-28