Evaluation of sandblasting with acid etching versus acid etching alone in the preparation of enamel for rebonding orthodontic brackets: An in vitro study and a randomized controlled trial

Dirie, Ahmad Rami; Hajeer, Mohammad Y; Dabbas, Jamal; Al-Ibrahim, Heba M

doi:10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.12.001

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Meanwhile, the reported optimum values are a minimum, and there is no consensus in this regard. [ 12 25 31 ] According to the findings, which compared four different groups, the highest level of SBS was in control group (29.440 MPa), followed by 22.666 MPa in re-etching by phosphoric acid group, 16.865 MPa in sandblast + acid etching group and 12.241 in the ER-YAG laser group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded stainless steel brackets with three different enamel surface conditioning methods

Safarzadeh

Kachuie

Birang

et al. 2023

Dental Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: During the orthodontic bonding process, the need for repositioning or rebonding of orthodontic brackets on the enamel surface occurs frequently. The aim of this study is to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) in rebonding orthodontic stainless steel brackets with three different methods of enamel surface conditioning methods. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 80 human premolars that were extracted for orthodontic purposes were randomly divided into four groups and underwent orthodontic bonding procedure (N = 20). Except for the control group, three other groups underwent debonding and rebonding process in which after removing the remaining adhesive with tungsten-carbide bur, enamel surface conditioned by three different methods including re-etching with phosphoric acid, sandblasting + acid etching, and Erbium-doped Yttrium–Aluminum–Garnet laser. Then, the SBS of the bracket to the enamel surface was compared between different groups. Scanning Electron microscopy images were also obtained from a number of samples. Statistical analysis was performed by Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests. Results: The highest SBS was observed in the primary bond (control group) with an average of 29,440 MPa. There was a significant difference between the studied groups (P < 0.001) and only the group that was re-etched with phosphoric acid had no significant difference with the control group (P = 0.708) ∝ =0.05. Conclusion: Rebonding of brackets using phosphoric acid for reconditioning of the enamel surface creates bond strength comparable to the primary bond. Other groups had significantly lower SBS than the control group.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 24 ] Combining sandblasting and acid etching methods have synergetic effects. [ 25 26 27 ] However, some believe that these effects are not statistically significant. [ 28 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded stainless steel brackets with three different enamel surface conditioning methods

Safarzadeh

Kachuie

Birang

et al. 2023

Dental Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bracket bond failure might be influenced by tooth location as differences in masticatory loads have been reported between anterior and posterior teeth. 25 Furthermore, masticatory and other mechanical loads applied to orthodontic brackets in a clinical setting might vary in terms of force magnitude, types of force (tensile or shear) and direction of application (including occlusogingival and mesiodistal) 26,27 ; which may all influence orthodontic bracket failure rates. Orthodontic brackets are also clinically subjected to repeated small loads causing cyclic fatigue; which may eventually lead to bracket failure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, patient related behaviours such as eating habits might also influence the frequency of bracket bond failure of teeth with and without EF. Bracket bond failure might be influenced by tooth location as differences in masticatory loads have been reported between anterior and posterior teeth 25 . Furthermore, masticatory and other mechanical loads applied to orthodontic brackets in a clinical setting might vary in terms of force magnitude, types of force (tensile or shear) and direction of application (including occlusogingival and mesiodistal) 26,27 ; which may all influence orthodontic bracket failure rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to human teeth with and without fluorotic enamel: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of experimental in vitro studies

Alvarez

Barmak

Rossouw

et al. 2022

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this systematic review was to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to human teeth with and without enamel fluorosis (EF) using conventional bonding interventions/techniques. An unrestricted search of indexed databases was performed with the following eligibility criteria: (a) human fluorotic teeth (experimental‐group); (b) human teeth without fluorosis (control‐group); (c) studies using phosphoric acid (PA) etching without air abrasion (AA), PA etching combined with AA, and application of self‐etching primer (SEP) alone as bonding interventions/techniques and (d) measuring SBS in megapascals (MPa). Data screening, selection and extraction were performed by two reviewers. The risk of bias (rob) was assessed using the JBI Critical appraisal tool for Quasi‐Experimental Studies. Meta‐analyses were performed using a random effects model. The quality of available evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Ten in vitro studies were included. Subgroup analyses were performed for each intervention type. The SBS was significantly lower in fluorotic teeth when PA was used without AA (mean difference = 3.26 MPa, confidence interval: [1.00, 5.52]); and there were no significant differences for the PA combined with AA and SEP interventions. All studies had a low rob. The overall level of evidence was at best low. The SBS is lower in teeth with EF when traditional PA is used. No significant differences were found in SBS between teeth with and without EF when PA is used with AA or when SEP is used alone.

show abstract

“…Theoretically, it is possible to change the geometry or the macrostructure of a tooth with the use of abrasive microsandblasters, but that would constitute an intensely laborious and time-consuming process due to the limited effectiveness of these devices and the use of nozzle orifices wider than in air-abrasion units, creating a wider abrasive jet [37]. Microstructural changes in the form of increased roughness and development of the adhesive surface are the leading reasons given by producers for choosing this type of device, so they are widely used in orthodontic bracket placement to enamel [38][39][40][41][42].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physicochemical Properties of Dentine Subjected to Microabrasive Blasting and Its Influence on Bonding to Self-Adhesive Prosthetic Cement in Shear Bond Strength Test: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the influence of microabrasive blasting on the physicochemical properties of dentine and shear bond strength (SBS) of self-adhesive resin cement (Maxcem Elite, Kerr, Orange, CA, USA) bonded to the dentine surface. Ninety cylindrical specimens with exposed dentine of human teeth were prepared and divided into three randomized, parallel sample sets A, B, and C. Groups B and C were subjected to abrasive blasting using a micro-sandblasting device (Microetcher IIa, Danville Materials, Carlsbad, CA, USA) with two gradations of Al2O3 abrasives (Group B, abrasion with a gradation of 50 mm; group C, abrasion with a gradation of 27 mm). SEM imaging, profilometry, chemical composition analysis, contact angle measurements, surface free energy, and SBS tests were performed. The resulting data were statistically analyzed using the Statistica software (ver. 13.3, Tibco Software Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA). Microabrasive blasting caused changes in surface topography, structural features, and the connection strength between the dentin surface and self-adhesive prosthetic cement. Air microabrasion through the multifactorial positive reorganization of the treated surface of dentine is recommended as a pretreatment method in fixed prosthodontics adhesive cementation protocols.

show abstract

Evaluation of sandblasting with acid etching versus acid etching alone in the preparation of enamel for rebonding orthodontic brackets: An in vitro study and a randomized controlled trial

Cited by 6 publications

References 27 publications

Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded stainless steel brackets with three different enamel surface conditioning methods

Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded stainless steel brackets with three different enamel surface conditioning methods

Comparison of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to human teeth with and without fluorotic enamel: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of experimental in vitro studies

Physicochemical Properties of Dentine Subjected to Microabrasive Blasting and Its Influence on Bonding to Self-Adhesive Prosthetic Cement in Shear Bond Strength Test: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About