Comparison of shear bond strength of metal orthodontic brackets bonded to a CAD/CAM prosthetic provisional material after the use of a self-adhesive resin cement versus a light adhesive paste and different surface conditioning protocols: An in vitro study

Morales, Katherine; Alvear, Gonzalo Andrés Garcés; Yagnam, Sharime; Bustos, Valentina; Belfus, Joyce; Rojas, Víctor

doi:10.1016/j.ortho.2022.100661

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, due to the low amount of carboxyl groups in the monomers, there is no chemical bonding with the enamel. As a result, the enamel must be conditioned beforehand and a dry working field is necessary ( 3 , 7 , 20 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shear bond strength of three different metal bracket base designs on human premolars: An in vitro comparative study

Corahua-Raymi,

Guardia-Huamani,

Cervantes-Ganoza

et al. 2024

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Adequate bracket-enamel bonding is critical to prevent detachment during orthodontic treatment and minimize any potential delay in results. The aim was to compare the shear bond strength of three metal bracket base designs: laser-structured base, mesh base, and retention grooves base. Material and Methods In this experimental in vitro study, 54 human premolars were immersed for one week in 0.1% thymol solution, then placed in distilled water with weekly replacement until the start of the study. The premolars were cemented with brackets of varying base designs: A. Discovery® Smart (laser structured), B. Mini Master® Series (base with mesh), and C. Roth Max (base with retention grooves). All brackets were cemented using TransbondTM XT. A universal testing machine was used to evaluate the shear bond strength at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/min. Welch’s one-factor ANOVA with robust variance and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to compare means, with a significance level of p <0.05. Results The average shear bond strength values were for the bracket with laser-structured base (14.78 ± 5.79 MPa), the bracket with mesh base (9.64 MPa ± 2.54 MPa) and the bracket with retention groove base (15.38 MPa ± 2.67 MPa). It was found that brackets with mesh bases had significantly lower shear bond strength than brackets with laser-structured bases ( p =0.001) and brackets with retention grooves bases ( p <0.001). No significant differences were observed between the latter two types of brackets ( p = 0.893). Conclusions The bracket base design influenced in vitro shear bond strength with significantly higher values observed for Roth Max and Discovery® Smart brackets compared to Mini Master® Series brackets. Key words: Shear strength, laser-structured bracket, bracket with mesh base, bracket with retention groove base.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…( 4 ) and Morales et al . ( 7 ) propose a range of 6 to 8 MPa. It has also been found that values above 20 MPa to 40 MPa may increase the risk of enamel breakage due to exceeding the cohesive forces of the adamantine structure ( 8 , 9 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shear bond strength of three different metal bracket base designs on human premolars: An in vitro comparative study

Corahua-Raymi,

Guardia-Huamani,

Cervantes-Ganoza

et al. 2024

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bonding orthodontic brackets clinically is of paramount importance for the overall effectiveness of orthodontic treatment [ 1 ]. In the past few years, adult orthodontic treatment has gained popularity [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Accordingly, there may be clinical scenarios in which orthodontic brackets are bonded to prosthetic or restorative surfaces.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When a fixed dental prosthesis is planned for an orthodontic patient, it is typically recommended that the insertion of the final prosthetic restoration be delayed until the completion of orthodontic therapy [ 1 ]. This delay permits the tooth to be repositioned to its final position after orthodontic treatment is completed before placing the final restoration [ 2 , 3 ]. In addition, any surface damage to the fixed restoration upon removal of bonded orthodontic brackets may necessitate replacement of the fixed dental restoration [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This delay permits the tooth to be repositioned to its final position after orthodontic treatment is completed before placing the final restoration [ 2 , 3 ]. In addition, any surface damage to the fixed restoration upon removal of bonded orthodontic brackets may necessitate replacement of the fixed dental restoration [ 3 ]. Therefore, interim restorations are placed between the completion of orthodontic therapy and the placement of the final prosthetic restoration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Different Primers on the Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded to Reinforced Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Substrate

EL-Awady,

ElHabbak,

Mohamed

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This in vitro study assessed the effect of different primers on the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) of orthodontic brackets bonded to reinforced polyetheretherketone (PEEK) substrate. A total of 40 specimens were randomly distributed to two groups based on the primer used for orthodontic bonding: group 1 (control)—Transbond XT adhesive with Visio.link primer and group 2 (test)—orthodontic adhesive (Transbond XT) with traditional orthodontic primer. After bonding, specimens were thermocycled followed by SBS testing and ARI scoring of debonded specimens. Data were analyzed using the unpaired independent t-test and the Chi-square test. Group 1 specimens showed significantly higher SBS values (21.38 ± 1.48 MPa) compared to group 2 specimens (18.63 ± 1.29 MPa) (p < 0.0001). Adhesive remnant index scores showed no significant variations in bond failure modes and distributions between groups. The SBS obtained by the tested primers exceeded the clinically recommended value. Consequently, there is a comparable clinical application for both tested primers in orthodontic bonding, especially the traditional orthodontic primer, where the availability of Visio.link in clinical practice is not ensured.

show abstract

In vitro assessment of chemical surface treatments on the shear bond strength of metal orthodontic brackets to CAD/CAM provisional materials

Alzaid,

Alanazi,

Alharbi

et al. 2024

Front. Dent. Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe growing demand for orthodontic treatment in patients irrespective of age highlights the need for effective bonding of brackets to provisional crowns (PCs).Aims and objectivesThis study evaluates the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets to 3D-printed and milled PC materials, comparing the effects of hydrofluoric acid (HFA) and phosphoric acid (PA) etching.Materials and methodsForty cylinders were fabricated using a 3D printer with hybrid resin, and forty were milled from cross-linked polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) resin. Stainless steel brackets were bonded with light-cured composite resin. Twenty specimens from each group were treated with 9.5% HFA, while the rest of the specimens received 37% PA. Post-bonding, specimens underwent thermocycling and were examined with SEM. SBS testing followed ISO/TS 11405-2015 guidelines. The failure patterns and bond interface were assessed by the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data was analyzed using ANOVA, Tukey's test.ResultsIn 3D-printed materials, HFA etching yielded a significantly higher bond strength (12.59 ± 2.64 MPa) than PA etching (7.77 ± 0.83 MPa). The bond strength was inferior in milled materials: HFA (5.98 ± 0.59 MPa) and PA (5.66 ± 0.65 MPa) with no significant difference between both surface treatments. When each material was evaluated separately, a significant difference in SBS was found for surface treatments in 3D-printed materials (p < 0.001) but not for milled materials (p = 0.916). ARI scores showed greater adhesive retention in 3D-printed specimens, particularly those treated with HFA. SEM revealed smoother surfaces in 3D-printed specimens compared to rougher surfaces in milled specimens.ConclusionHFA etching improves SBS in 3D-printed PC, while in milled materials, the choice of etching agent has minimal effect.

show abstract

Comparison of shear bond strength of metal orthodontic brackets bonded to a CAD/CAM prosthetic provisional material after the use of a self-adhesive resin cement versus a light adhesive paste and different surface conditioning protocols: An in vitro study

Cited by 4 publications

References 23 publications

Shear bond strength of three different metal bracket base designs on human premolars: An in vitro comparative study

Shear bond strength of three different metal bracket base designs on human premolars: An in vitro comparative study

Effect of Different Primers on the Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded to Reinforced Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Substrate

In vitro assessment of chemical surface treatments on the shear bond strength of metal orthodontic brackets to CAD/CAM provisional materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About