Evaluation of the shear bond strength of ceramic orthodontic brackets to glazed monolithic zirconia using different bonding protocols

Youmna Douara, Sally Abdul Kader, Hassan E Kassem, Mohamed I. Mowafy
{"title":"Evaluation of the shear bond strength of ceramic orthodontic brackets to glazed monolithic zirconia using different bonding protocols","authors":"Youmna Douara, Sally Abdul Kader, Hassan E Kassem, Mohamed I. Mowafy","doi":"10.21608/eos.2019.77627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractAIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of ceramic brackets to glazed monolithic zirconia using three different bonding protocols.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five monolithic glazed zirconia embedded into acrylic resin were randomly assigned to 3 groups (n = 15) following air abrasion by 50 μm aluminum oxide particles, the groups were treated with: (A) Assure Plus, (B) Silane + Assure Plus (C) Hydrofluoric acid + Silane + Transbond XT primer. Ceramic brackets were bonded to the zirconia discs using Transbond XT. Following thermocycling (500 cycles, 5° - 55° C), SBS, failure mode and Adhesive Remnant Index were assessed.RESULTS:Group C showed the highest SBS followed by Group B with no statistically significant difference. Most of the specimens in Group C showed an adhesive failure between the bracket base and the adhesive, whereas Group B presented mainly a mixed cohesive adhesive failure. SBS in Group A was significantly lower than either groups showing an adhesive failure at the zirconia- adhesive interface.CONCLUSIONS: Both Assure Plus + Silane and the classical ceramic bonding protocol achieved clinically acceptable SBS of ceramic brackets bonded to glazed zirconia. However, Assure Plus + Silane achieved better debonding characteristics.","PeriodicalId":305086,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal","volume":"111 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/eos.2019.77627","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

AbstractAIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of ceramic brackets to glazed monolithic zirconia using three different bonding protocols.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five monolithic glazed zirconia embedded into acrylic resin were randomly assigned to 3 groups (n = 15) following air abrasion by 50 μm aluminum oxide particles, the groups were treated with: (A) Assure Plus, (B) Silane + Assure Plus (C) Hydrofluoric acid + Silane + Transbond XT primer. Ceramic brackets were bonded to the zirconia discs using Transbond XT. Following thermocycling (500 cycles, 5° - 55° C), SBS, failure mode and Adhesive Remnant Index were assessed.RESULTS:Group C showed the highest SBS followed by Group B with no statistically significant difference. Most of the specimens in Group C showed an adhesive failure between the bracket base and the adhesive, whereas Group B presented mainly a mixed cohesive adhesive failure. SBS in Group A was significantly lower than either groups showing an adhesive failure at the zirconia- adhesive interface.CONCLUSIONS: Both Assure Plus + Silane and the classical ceramic bonding protocol achieved clinically acceptable SBS of ceramic brackets bonded to glazed zirconia. However, Assure Plus + Silane achieved better debonding characteristics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同粘结方式下陶瓷正畸托槽与釉面整体氧化锆的剪切粘结强度评价
摘要:采用三种不同的粘接方式,研究陶瓷支架与釉面氧化锆的剪切粘接强度(SBS)。材料与方法:将45颗镶嵌在丙烯酸树脂中的单片釉面氧化锆随机分为3组(n = 15),每组经50 μm氧化铝颗粒气磨处理:(A) Assure Plus, (B)硅烷+ Assure Plus (C)氢氟酸+硅烷+跨键XT底漆处理。利用Transbond XT将陶瓷支架与氧化锆盘结合。热循环(500次,5°- 55°C)后,评估SBS、失效模式和粘合剂残留指数。结果:C组SBS最高,B组次之,差异无统计学意义。C组以支架底座与胶粘剂粘结破坏为主,B组以混合粘结破坏为主。A组的SBS明显低于两组,表现为氧化锆-胶粘剂界面的粘接失效。结论:Assure Plus +硅烷与经典陶瓷结合方案均可获得临床可接受的釉面氧化锆陶瓷支架SBS。然而,Assure Plus +硅烷实现了更好的脱粘特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparison Of Different Imaging Software For Measuring Volume Of The Maxillary Sinus Splint-Supported Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device Versus Class II Intermaxillary elastics For The Correction Of Class II Malocclusion ; A Retrospective Study Effect Of White Spot Lesion Pretreatment With Silver Diamine Fluoride Compared To Diode Laser On The Shear Bond Strength Of Orthodontic Brackets. An In-Vitro Study Association Of Soft Tissue Facial Form & Dental Arch Form: A Cross Sectional Comparative Study Association Of Molar Angulation With Anterior Crowding And Dental Inclinations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1