Tensile bond strength of ceramic orthodontic brackets bonded to porcelain surfaces

Kocadereli, İlken; Canay, Şenay; Akça, Kıvanç

doi:10.1067/mod.2001.113655

Cited by 92 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The maxillary premolar teeth are the teeth which are most frequently extracted as an integral part of the orthodontic therapy. Therefore, the premolar tooth form was selected to allow a clinical simulation and to compare the outcome of the present study with those of previously reported investigations [9,11].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The high bond strength results from silanization of the bracket base, mechanical retention, or both [6,7]. The silane coupling agents have been reported to enhance the bond strength to the porcelain surfaces [8,9]. The silane reacts with the silica within the porcelain and the organic groups of the bonding resin, thus forming a bridge between the two materials [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Shear Bond Strengths of Metal and Ceramic Brackets: An in-Vitro Comparative Study

Reddy

Sharma²,

Singh³

et al. 2013

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study has compared the Shear Bond Strengths (SBSs) of ceramic brackets and metal brackets. Materials and Method:Forty freshly extracted, human maxillary first premolars were selected for bonding. They were equally bonded with ceramic brackets (Transcend series 6000) and metal brackets (Mini Dynalock Straight wire brackets). A no -mix orthodontic adhesive system was used. Their shear bond strengths were measured by using the Instron universal machine. Results:The mean bond strength of the ceramic brackets was 20.68 ± 3.89 Mpa and that of the metal brackets was 12.15 ± 1.32 MPa. Conclusion:The shear bond strength of the ceramic brackets was found to be superior than that of the metal brackets.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Shear Bond Strengths of Metal and Ceramic Brackets: An in-Vitro Comparative Study

Reddy

Sharma²,

Singh³

et al. 2013

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The purpose of mechanical alteration of the porcelain surface is to remove the glaze and roughen the surface to provide mechanical retention for the orthodontic adhesive. This alteration can be achieved by sandblasting [2][3][4][5][6] or using a coarse diamond stone. 2,7 However, mechanical roughening with burs or sandblasting causes irreversible damage to the porcelain glaze, [8][9][10][11][12] and porcelain restorations may be fractured at bracket debonding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Porcelain Refinishing with Two Different Polishing Systems after Orthodontic Debonding

Karan

Toroğlu

2008

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:To compare the effects of two polishing systems on the surface roughness of three types of porcelain after orthodontic debonding. Materials and Methods: A total of 90 porcelain discs were fabricated from feldspathic (n ϭ 30), leucite-based (n ϭ 30) or lithia disilicate-based (n ϭ 30) ceramics. Ten samples in each group served as the control and received no surface treatment. The remaining 60 samples in three of the porcelain groups were bonded with lower incisor brackets and debonded using a testing machine in shear mode at a rate of 1 mm/minute crosshead speed. After debonding, the remaining adhesive resin was removed with a tungsten carbide bur. Then, two experimental subgroups (10 each) in each porcelain group were treated as follows: in the first subgroup, porcelain polishing wheel and polishing paste were applied, whereas in the second, polishing was performed using a series of Sof-Lex discs. The average surface roughness (Ra) of the all samples was evaluated using SPM/AFM (surface probe microscope/atomic force microscope). Data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance for each porcelain material and polishing method. Results: The polishing techniques affected surface roughness significantly. There were significant differences between the groups; higher Ra values were obtained with the use of porcelain polishing wheel and polishing paste (P Ͻ .001). Conclusion:The application of Sof-Lex discs can produce smoother porcelain surfaces than porcelain polishing wheel and polishing paste.

show abstract

“…A sufficient bond strength could not be obtained when using a mechanical etching procedure with diamond stone burs (Barbosa & Almedia, 1995 ;Cochran & O'Keefe, 1997), sandblasting (Andreasen & Stieg, 1998;Kocadereli & Canay, 2001;Cochran & O'Keefe, 1997;Zachrisson & Zachrisson, 1996), or sandpaper discs. (Barbosa & Almedia, 1995 ;Cochran & O'Keefe, 1997) To ensure an adequate bond strength, removal of the glaze layer on a porcelain surface and a suitable mechanical retention area are needed.…”

Section: Sandblasting (Air-abrasive ) Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modern Etching and Bonding Materials in Orthodontics

Başaran¹,

Veli²

2011

Principles in Contemporary Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tensile bond strength of ceramic orthodontic brackets bonded to porcelain surfaces

Cited by 92 publications

References 20 publications

The Shear Bond Strengths of Metal and Ceramic Brackets: An in-Vitro Comparative Study

The Shear Bond Strengths of Metal and Ceramic Brackets: An in-Vitro Comparative Study

Porcelain Refinishing with Two Different Polishing Systems after Orthodontic Debonding

Modern Etching and Bonding Materials in Orthodontics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About