Shear bond strength of ceramic brackets bonded to surface-treated feldspathic porcelain after thermocycling

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinar Cevik ◽  
Oguz Eraslan ◽  
Kursat Eser ◽  
Suleyman Tekeli
Keyword(s):  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Nd:Yag Laser ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Airborne Particle ◽  
Surface Conditioning ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
Feldspathic Porcelain

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of six different surface conditioning methods on the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets bonded to feldspathic porcelain. Materials and methods: A total of 60 feldspathic porcelain disks were fabricated and divided into six subgroups including 10 specimens in each. Specimens were first treated one of the following surface conditioning methods, namely, 37% phosphoric acid (G-H3PO4), 9.4% hydrofluoric acid (G-HF), grinding with diamond burs (G-Grinding), Nd:YAG laser (G-Nd:YAG), Airborne-particle abrasion (G-Abrasion). Specimens were also coated with silane without surface treatment for comparison (G-Untreated). A total of 60 ceramic brackets were bonded to porcelain surfaces with a composite resin and then subjected to thermocycling 2500× between 5°C and 55°C. The shear bond strength test was carried out using a universal testing device at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Failure types were classified according to the adhesive remnant index. Analysis of variance and Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Microstructure of untreated and surface-treated specimens was investigated by scanning electron microscopy. Results: Using G-Abrasion specimens resulted in the highest shear bond strength value of 8.58 MPa for feldspathic porcelain. However, the other specimens showed lower values: G-Grinding (6.51 MPa), G-Nd:YAG laser (3.37 MPa), G-HF (2.71 MPa), G-H3PO4 (1.17 MPa), and G-Untreated (0.93 MPa). Conclusion: Airborne-particle abrasion and grinding can be used as surface treatment techniques on the porcelain surface for a durable bond strength. Hydrofluoric acid and phosphoric acid etching methods were not convenient as surface treatment methods for the feldspathic porcelain.

scholarly journals Four chemical methods of porcelain conditioning and their influence over bond strength and surface integrity

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
João Paulo Fragomeni Stella ◽  
Andrea Becker Oliveira ◽  
Lincoln Issamu Nojima ◽  
Mariana Marquezan
Keyword(s):  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Integrity ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Ceramic Surface ◽  
Surface Conditioning ◽  
Phosphoric Acid Etching

OBJECTIVE: To assess four different chemical surface conditioning methods for ceramic material before bracket bonding, and their impact on shear bond strength and surface integrity at debonding.METHODS: Four experimental groups (n = 13) were set up according to the ceramic conditioning method: G1 = 37% phosphoric acid etching followed by silane application; G2 = 37% liquid phosphoric acid etching, no rinsing, followed by silane application; G3 = 10% hydrofluoric acid etching alone; and G4 = 10% hydrofluoric acid etching followed by silane application. After surface conditioning, metal brackets were bonded to porcelain by means of the Transbond XP system (3M Unitek). Samples were submitted to shear bond strength tests in a universal testing machine and the surfaces were later assessed with a microscope under 8 X magnification. ANOVA/Tukey tests were performed to establish the difference between groups (α= 5%).RESULTS: The highest shear bond strength values were found in groups G3 and G4 (22.01 ± 2.15 MPa and 22.83 ± 3.32 Mpa, respectively), followed by G1 (16.42 ± 3.61 MPa) and G2 (9.29 ± 1.95 MPa). As regards surface evaluation after bracket debonding, the use of liquid phosphoric acid followed by silane application (G2) produced the least damage to porcelain. When hydrofluoric acid and silane were applied, the risk of ceramic fracture increased.CONCLUSIONS: Acceptable levels of bond strength for clinical use were reached by all methods tested; however, liquid phosphoric acid etching followed by silane application (G2) resulted in the least damage to the ceramic surface.

scholarly journals Assessment the Bond Strength of Ceramic Brackets to CAD/CAM Nanoceramic Composite and Interpenetrating Network Composite after Different Surface Treatments

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Mehmet Özarslan ◽  
Özlem Üstün ◽  
Ulviye Sebnem Buyukkaplan ◽  
Çağatay Barutcigil ◽  
Nurullah Türker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Interpenetrating Network ◽  
Bonding Performance ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
New Generation

Adult orthodontics may confront problems related to the bonding performance of orthodontic brackets to new generation restorative materials used for crown or laminate restorations. The aim of the present study was to investigate the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets to two new generation CAD/CAM interpenetrating network composite and nanoceramic composite after different surface treatments. Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, hydrofluoric acid (9%), sandblasting (50 μm Al2O3), and silane were applied to the surfaces of 120 CAD/CAM specimens with 2 mm thickness and then ceramic brackets were bonded to the treated surfaces of the specimens. Bond strength was evaluated using the shear bond strength test. According to the results, CAD/CAM block types and surface treatment methods have significant effects on shear bond strength. The lowest bond strength values were found in the specimens treated with silane (3.35 ± 2.09 MPa) and highest values were found in the specimens treated with sandblast (8.92 ± 2.77 MPa). Sandblasting and hydrofluoric acid surface treatment led to the most durable bonds for the two types of CAD/CAM blocks in the present study. In conclusion, different surface treatments affect the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets to CAD/CAM interpenetrating network composite and nanoceramic composite. Among the evaluated treatments, sandblasting and hydrofluoric acid application resulted in sufficient bonding strength to ceramic brackets for both of the CAD/CAM materials.

Shear bond strength of metal brackets to feldspathic porcelain treated by Nd:YAG laser and hydrofluoric acid

2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 837-841 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hashem Hosseini ◽  
Farhad Sobouti ◽  
Ardavan Etemadi ◽  
Nasim Chiniforush ◽  
Mahsa shariati
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Nd:Yag Laser ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Feldspathic Porcelain

scholarly journals Comparison of Shear Strength of Metal and Ceramic Orthodontic Brackets Cemented to Zirconia Depending on Surface Treatment: An In Vitro Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (02) ◽  
pp. 150-155
Author(s):  
Sibel Cetik ◽  
Thaï Hoang Ha ◽  
Léa Sitri ◽  
Hadrien Duterme ◽  
Viet Pham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Preparation ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Airborne Particle ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
Ceramic Bracket

Abstract Objectives Due to the high demand for all-ceramic restorations, monolithic zirconia restorations are nowadays frequently used. With the demand for adult orthodontic treatments, orthodontists need to be mindful of the quality of their brackets bonding to this type of material, as it requires special conditioning. This study aimed to compare different surface treatments of zirconia when bonding metal or ceramic orthodontic brackets. The objectives are to compare the shear bond strength; the amount of adhesive remaining on the surface of the material; the incidence of adhesive, cohesive, and mixed failures; and the occurrence of zirconia fractures. Materials and Methods Forty monolithic blocks of zirconia of a diameter of 10 mm and a length of 10 mm were prepared and randomly divided into two groups (n = 20): metallic or ceramic brackets. Each group was subsequently divided into two subgroups (n = 10) depending on the surface preparation (laser treatment or airborne particle abrasion): SMB (airborne particle abrasion, metal bracket), SCB (airborne particle abrasion, ceramic bracket), LMB (laser; metal bracket), and LCB (laser, ceramic bracket). The samples were tested for shear bond strength using a universal testing machine. The adhesive remnant index and the occurrence of zirconia fractures and different types of failures were assessed by optical and electron microscopy. Statistical Analysis Results were analyzed using analysis of variance. Results The differences were significant between the metallic (SMB, LMB) and ceramic (SCB, LCB) bracket groups with regard to shear bond strength, with respectively 23.29 ± 5.34 MPa, 21.59 ± 4.03 MPa, 20.06 ± 4.05 MPa, and 17.55 ± 3.88 MPa. In terms of surface treatment, no statistical differences were found between the different groups. Conclusion Metal brackets have a greater bond strength than ceramic brackets when cemented to zirconia. The surface treatment of zirconia surface has no influence on the shear bond strength.

scholarly journals Impact of Intracoronal Dentin Treatment Prior to Bleaching on Bond Strength of Restorative Materials

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 519-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Moreno Zanconato-Carvalho ◽  
João Felipe Bruniera ◽  
Natália Spadini de Faria ◽  
Vivian Colucci ◽  
Danielle Cristine Messias
Keyword(s):  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Er:Yag Laser ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Bleaching Procedure ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Restorative Materials

Surface treatment of dentin before the bleaching procedure may affect its permeability and influence the bond strength of restorative materials. This study evaluated the influence of surface treatment before the bleaching on shear bond strength (SBT) of restorative materials to intracoronal dentin. Dentin slabs were subjected to surface treatment: no bleaching (control - CON), no surface treatment + bleaching (HP), 37% phosphoric acid + bleaching (PA) and Er:YAG laser + bleaching (L). After the bleaching procedure, specimens (n=10) were restored with: microhybrid composite resin (MH), flowable composite resin (F), and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC). The shear test was carried out. ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05) showed significant difference for surface treatment and restorative materials (p<0.05). CON presented higher STB and was statistically different from HP (p<0.05). PA and L showed intermediate values and were statistically similar to CON and HP (p>0.05). STB for MH and F were higher than RMGIC (p<0.05), and did not differ from each other (p>0.05). The surface treatments with phosphoric acid and Er:YAG laser before the bleaching procedure provided shear bond strength at the same level of unbleached dentin and the composite resins presented superior bond strength to the intracoronal dentin.

scholarly journals Effect of surface treatment on the shear bond strength of a resin-based cement to porcelain

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 290-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Paulo Nagayassu ◽  
Luciana Keiko Shintome ◽  
Eduardo Shigueyuki Uemura ◽  
José Eduardo Junho de Araújo
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Vitro Study ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
And Control

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength of a resin-based cement to porcelain. Sixty pairs of 50% aluminous porcelain discs were fabricated. In each pair, one disc measured 6 mm in diameter X 3 mm thickness (A) and the other measured 3 mm in diameter X 3mm thickness (B). The specimens were randomly assigned to 6 groups (n=10 pairs of discs), according to the surface treatment: etching with 10% hydrofluoric acid for 2 or 4min (G1 and G2); 50-µm particle aluminum oxide sandblasting for 5 s (G3); sandblasting followed by etching for 2 or 4min (G4 and G5) and control - no treatment (G6). A silane agent was applied to the treated surface of both discs of each pair. Bistite II DC dual-cure resin cement was applied and the B discs were bonded to their respective A discs. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 h and were tested in shear strength at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/min. Means in MPa were: G1: 14.21 ± 4.68; G2: 8.92 ± 3.02; G3: 10.04 ± 2.37; G4: 12.74 ± 5.15; G5: 10.99 ± 3.35; G6: 6.09 ± 1.84. Data were compared by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. Bond strength recorded after 2-min acid etching was significantly higher than 4-min etching (p<0.05) and control (p<0.05), but did not differ significantlyfrom sandblasting alone (p>0.05) or followed by etching for 2 or 4 min (p>0.05). Within the limitations of an in vitro study, it may be concluded that 2-min hydrofluoric acid etching produced a favorable micromechanical retention that enhanced resin cement bond strength to porcelain.

scholarly journals Evaluation of shear bond strength of composite to porcelain according to surface treatment

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Minami Kussano ◽  
Gerson Bonfante ◽  
José Gilmar Batista ◽  
João Henrique Nogueira Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Room Temperature ◽  
Force Load ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

This study evaluated the shear bond strength of porcelain/composite using 40 metal + porcelain + composite cylindrical specimens divided into 4 groups, according to porcelain surface treatment: 1) no treatment, 2) mechanical retentions performed with diamond burs, 3) etching with phosphoric acid+silane, and 4) etching with hydrofluoric acid+silane. After being stored in distilled water at room temperature for one week, the specimens were submitted to a shear force (load) and the data were analyzed statistically (ANOVA). The means (in Mpa) of the groups were: 4.71 (group 1); 4.81 (group 2); 11.76 (group 3); 11.07 (group 4). There were no statistically significant differences between groups 1 and 2 and between groups 3 and 4.

scholarly journals Effect of Acid Etching, Silane and Thermal Cycling on the Bond Strength of Metallic Brackets to Ceramic

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natália Regina Santos de Matos ◽  
Ana Rosa Costa ◽  
Heloísa Cristina Valdrighi ◽  
Américo Bortolazzo Correr ◽  
Silvia Amélia Vedovello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Thermal Cycling ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Deionized Water ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Ceramic Surface ◽  
Adhesive Remnant Index ◽  
Post Hoc

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of silanes, thermal cycling and acid etching on the shear bond strength (SBS) of metallic brackets to feldspathic ceramic. Feldspathic ceramic cylinders (Groups 1, 2, 5 and 6) were etched for 60 s with 10% hydrofluoric acid and Groups 3, 4, 7 and 8, without acid etching. Two layers of silane Clearfil Ceramic Primer (CCP, Groups 1 to 4) and two layers of RelyX Ceramic Primer (RCP, groups 5 to 8) were applied and dried for 60 s. Brackets were bonded to the cylinders with Transbond XT and light-activated for 40 s with Bluephase G2. All specimens were stored in deionized water at 37 °C for 24 h, and the specimens of groups 1, 3, 5 and 7 were submitted to 7,000 thermal cycles (5 °C/55 °C). After storage, the SBS test was performed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were subjected to three-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (α=0.05). The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was evaluated at 8x magnification. The SBS of CCP was significantly greater than of RCP (p<0.05), with or without thermal cycling. Thermal cycling significantly reduced the SBS (p<0.05). The groups submitted to acid etching showed significantly higher SBS than those without acid etching (p<0.05). In conclusion, thermal cycling reduced SBS for all groups. The best ceramic surface treatment for bracket bonding was achieved by acid etching and CCP silane. The ARI results showed predominance of score 0 for all groups.

scholarly journals Shear Bond Strength of Ceramic Brackets with Different Base Designs to Feldspathic Porcelains

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 571-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Buncha Samruajbenjakul ◽  
Boonlert Kukiattrakoon
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Adhesive Failure ◽  
Metal Mesh ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
Large Round ◽  
Feldspathic Porcelain ◽  
Base Design

Abstract Objective: To test the hypothesis that the there is no difference between the shear bond strengths of different base designs of ceramic brackets bonded to glazed feldspathic porcelains. Materials and Methods: Forty glazed feldspathic porcelain specimens (15 mm in diameter and 1.5 mm in thickness) were prepared and divided into 4 groups (n = 10). Ten pieces of each group of different ceramic bracket base designs (beads, large round pits, and irregular base) and one group of stainless steel brackets (served as a control) were bonded to glazed feldspathic porcelains under a 200 gram load. Then all samples were subjected to shear bond strength evaluation with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.2 mm/min. Data were analyzed through one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test at a .05 significance level. The mode of failure after debonding was examined under a stereoscope. Results: This study revealed that the beads base design had the greatest shear bond strength (24.7 ± 1.9 MPa) and was significantly different from the large round pits base (21.3 ± 2 MPa), irregular base (19.2 ± 2.0 MPa), and metal mesh base (15.2 ± 2.4 MPa). The beads base design had 100% porcelain-adhesive failure, the large round pits had 100% bracket-adhesive failure, and the irregular base design had 70% combination failure and 30% porcelain-adhesive failure. Conclusions: The hypothesis is rejected. The various base designs of metal and ceramic brackets influence bond strength to glazed feldspathic porcelain, but all should be clinically acceptable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document