Shear bond strength of brackets on restorative materials: Comparison on various dental restorative materials using the universal primer Monobond® Plus

Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to a new version of zirconium all ceramic restoration: An in vitro comparative study

Objectives

Esthetic restorations such as monolithic zirconia crowns are highly requested for adults nowadays. Bonding orthodontic braces on this type of material became a challenge for orthodontists, because of the special surface treatment needed. This study aims to assess the shear bond strength (SBS) of metal, and ceramic brackets bonded on two types of zirconia ceramics, surface roughness (SR) after different surface treatments for their surfaces, and adhesive remnant index (ARI).

Materials and methods

Brackets' base surface area (BSA) was scanned by an extra-oral scanner, then measured. The doubled labial surface of monolithic zirconia crowns (n = 30) and monolithic high translucent zirconia crowns (n = 30) were prepared and each was divided into three groups (n = 10) depending on surface treatment (hydrofluoric acid etching, no treatment, and rocatec airborne abrasion). Extracted lower central incisors (n = 20) were prepared. Each of them was divided into two subgroups depending on the type of bracket bonded on their surfaces (metal and ceramic). The SR, SBS, and ARI were assessed.

Statistical analysis used

Tests used are independent-samples t-test, Fisher's exact test, One-Way ANOVA, and Kruskal-Wallis test.

Results

The highest SBS and SR were observed in Enamel/Metal and Zirconia/Metal/Rocatec subgroups, respectively.

Conclusion

Adequate bond strength could be obtained with the high translucent zirconia group if bonded with ceramic or metal brackets even if no treatment was used.

Clinical significance

A proportion of simulation was done like practicing inside the dental clinic to reach the best results regarding the adhesion strength of orthodontic brackets.

Effect of fluoride varnish in combination with simulated oral environment on enamel-bracket shear bond strength

To determine the effect of fluoride varnish application combined with a simulated oral environment prior to bracket bonding on the shear bond strength (SBS) between brackets and tooth enamel. Sixty de-identified, extracted teeth were grouped to either receive or not receive fluoride varnish and then stored for 7 days at 37 °C in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution or PBS combined with three 15-min cycles/day in a demineralizing solution to simulate pH variation following meals. Subsequently, brackets were bonded and after 24-h dark cure at 37 °C, debonded using shear forces in a simulated oral environment. The maximum shear force was used to calculate SBS, and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) was determined by image analysis of photos of the bracket mesh pad after debonding. A statistically higher SBS (10.16 MPa) was observed when fluoride varnish was applied prior to storage in PBS + demineralizing solution compared to SBS (6.38 MPa) following storage in the same solution without varnish application. Based on 37% effect size, this difference is also clinically relevant. In contrast, no significant differences in SBS were observed with varnish application combined with PBS with no demineralizing solution or between storage solution alone. Moreover, there was no significant difference in ARI due to varnish combined with either storage method or storage solution only. Results suggest varnish application prior to bracket bonding in combination with simulated oral environment that included acid exposure is beneficial in maintaining higher SBS between bracket and enamel. Despite higher SBS, adhesive remaining on enamel did not increase.

Orthodontic bonding to silicate ceramics: impact of different pretreatment methods on shear bond strength between ceramic restorations and ceramic brackets

Objective

The study aims to investigate the shear bond strength (SBS) between silicate ceramic restorations and ceramic brackets after different pretreatments and aging methods.

Material and methods

Leucite (LEU) and lithium disilicate (LiSi) specimens were pretreated with (i) 4% hydrofluoric acid + silane (HF), (ii) Monobond Etch&Prime (MEP), (iii) silicatization + silane (CoJet), and (iv) SiC grinder + silane (SiC). Molars etched (phosphoric acid) and conditioned acted as comparison group. SBS was measured after 24 h (distilled water, 37 °C), 500 × thermocycling (5/55 °C), and 90 days (distilled water, 37 °C). Data was analyzed using Shapiro–Wilk, Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post hoc test and Bonferroni correction, Mann–Whitney U, and Chi² test (p < 0.05). The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was determined.

Results

LEU pretreated with MEP showed lower SBS than pretreated with HF, CoJet, or SiC. LiSi pretreated with MEP resulted in lower initial SBS than pretreated with HF or SiC. After thermocycling, pretreatment using MEP led to lower SBS than with CoJet. Within LiSi group, after 90 days, the pretreatment using SiC resulted in lowest SBS values. After HF and MEP pretreatment, LEU showed lower initial SBS than LiSi. After 90 days of water storage, within specimens pretreated using CoJet or SiC showed LEU higher SBS than LiSi. Enamel presented higher or comparable SBS values to LEU and LiSi. With exception of MEP pretreatment, ARI 3 was predominantly observed, regardless the substrate, pretreatment, and aging level.

Conclusions

MEP pretreatment presented the lowest SBS values, regardless the silicate ceramic and aging level. Further research is necessary.

Clinical relevance

There is no need for intraoral application of HF for orthodontic treatment.

Effect of universal adhesive and silane pretreatment on bond durability of metal brackets to dental glass ceramics

This study aimed to investigate the effect of universal adhesive and silane pretreatment on the bond durability of metal brackets to dental glass ceramics. Eighty lithium disilicate glass ceramic specimens were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 20) defined by the pretreatment and adhesive used: (i) Adper Single Bond 2; (ii) silane + Adper Single Bond 2; (iii) Single Bond Universal; and (iv) silane +Single Bond Universal. Maxillary central incisor metal brackets were bonded on the ceramic surfaces with resin composite. A shear bond strength test was conducted after 24 h of water storage and after 10,000 thermocycles. Adhesive remnant index scoring and field-emission scanning electron microscopy were performed to determine adhesives remaining on the ceramic surfaces and the ceramic ultrastructure following bracket debonding, respectively. After 10,000 thermocycles, specimens treated with Single Bond Universal preserved an appropriate bond strength between brackets and glass ceramics and showed minimum ceramic surface damage following bracket debonding, which was not the case in the other three groups. The application of a silane-containing universal adhesive without silane pretreatment achieves adequate durability of the bond of metal brackets to dental glass ceramics and allows safe debonding, which may aid in optimizing the effectiveness for orthodontic treatment.

In vitro testing of shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to different novel CAD/CAM ceramics

Background. The present study aimed to evaluate the bond strength of metal bracket (MB) and ceramic bracket (CB) bonded to different CAD/CAM ceramic substrates etched with hydrofluoric acid (HFA) vs. phosphoric acid (PA).

Methods. A total of 120 CAD/CAM ceramic blocks in 12 groups were fabricated from three different CAD/CAM ceramic materials: VITABLOCS Mark II, VITAENAMIC, and IPS e.max CAD. Each ceramic material group was divided into two etching groups: one treated with 9.5% HFA and the other treated with 37%. Sixty metal and CBs of the upper right central incisor were bonded to the HFA-treated blocks. Another 60 metal and CBs were bonded to the PA treated blocks. All the bonded specimens were thermocycled before shear bond strength (SBS) testing. Then the bond failure mode was recorded

Results. There were no significant differences in SBS values between the three CAD/CAM ceramic materials. The HFA-treated specimens exhibited significantly higher SBS values than the PA-treated specimens. Also, the SBS values of CBs were significantly higher than the metal brackets (MBs). The adhesive remnant index (ARI) score was 4 for most of the groups, indicating that almost no adhesive remained on the porcelain surface.

Conclusion. The CAD/CAM ceramic type did not influence SBS; however, HFA exhibited significantly higher SBS compared to PA.

Shear bond strength evaluation of metallic brackets bonded to a CAD/CAM PMMA material compared to traditional prosthetic temporary materials: an in vitro study

INTRODUCTION

Orthodontic treatment for adults is currently increasing, and therefore the need to bond brackets to restorations and temporary crowns. The use of CAD/CAM PMMA provisional restorations for orthodontic purposes have not yet been described, and there is currently insufficient information regarding the strength of bracket adhesion.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed at evaluating the effects of thermocycling (TC) and surface treatment on shear bond strength (SBS) of brackets to different provisional materials.

METHODS

Forty specimens were made from each material [PMMA (Telio Lab), bis-acryl (Telio CS C&B), and PMMA CAD/CAM (Telio CAD)], sandpapered, and divided according to surface treatment (pumiced or sandblasted) and TC (half of the samples = 1,000 cycles, 5°C/55°C water baths) (n = 10/group). Stainless-steel brackets were bonded to the specimens (using Transbond XT), and SBS testing was performed. Data were analyzed by three-way ANOVA and LSD post-hoc tests (α = 0.05). Failure types were classified with adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores.

RESULTS

SBS values ranged from 1.5 to 14.9 MPa. Sandblasted bis-acryl and sandblasted auto-curing PMMA groups presented similar values (p> 0.05), higher than the CAD/CAM material (p< 0.05), with or without TC. When thermocycled, pumiced bis-acryl showed higher SBS than pumiced acrylic (p= 0.005) and CAD/CAM materials (p= 0.000), with statistical difference (p= 0.009). TC showed negative effect (p< 0.05) for sandblasted bis-acryl and pumiced acrylic groups. ARI predominant score was mostly zero (0) for CAD/CAM, 1 and 2 for bis-acryl, and 1 for acrylic groups.

CONCLUSION

In general, bis-acryl material showed the highest SBS values, followed by acrylic and CAD/CAM materials, which showed SBS values lower than an optimum strength for bonding brackets.

Adhesive luting of orthodontic devices to silica-based ceramic crowns-comparison of shear bond strength and surface properties

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of different clinical conditioning approaches and an ammonium polyfluoride- and trimethoxysilylpropyl methacrylate-based experimental primer for intraoral luting of buccal tubes on silica-based ceramic surfaces.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 60 leucite-reinforced glass ceramic molar crowns were conditioned using different methods (n = 10): I-roughening, hydrofluoric acid, silane; II-roughening, silane; III-roughening, experimental coupling agent; IV-experimental coupling agent; V-roughening; VI-no treatment. A buccal tube was adhesively luted to the ceramic surface. Subsequently, water storage, thermocycling and chewing simulation were carried out. The shear bond strength (SBS) was determined, and changes in the surface were assessed.

RESULTS

All tubes of the control group (group VI) debonded after incubation. The conditioning methods using coupling agents revealed mean values for SBS of 61.56 MPa (group I), 45.53 MPa (group III), 41.65 MPa (group II), and 23.14 MPa (group IV). In groups I-III, both composite residues and cracks/tear-outs were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The conditioning of silicate ceramic surfaces with a suitable coupling agent system appears to allow sufficient adhesive luting of buccal tubes. The intraoral luting of fixed appliance elements on silicate ceramic surfaces using an ammonium polyfluoride- and trimethoxysilylpropyl methacrylate-based ceramic primer can withstand orthodontic forces.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Ammonium polyfluoride- and trimethoxysilylpropyl methacrylate-based ceramic primers revealed promising results for the intraoral adhesive luting of orthodontic devices to silica-based ceramic crowns.

Two-part implant abutments with titanium and ceramic components: Surface modification affects retention forces-An in-vitro study

OBJECTIVES

Two-part abutments consist of titanium base and ceramic coping. Their long-term success is largely determined by the mechanical stability. The aim of the present study was to investigate the retention forces of two-part implant abutments. The study included zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramics copings, with different surface treatments and resin-based luting agents.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The analysis of retention forces was based on a total of 70 test specimens. Seven surface modifications and three resin-based luting agents were employed for the bonding of components in the seven groups (n = 70). All surfaces of titanium bases-except for a control-were pretreated with aluminum oxide blasting, either alone or in combination with surface activating primers. Surfaces of ceramic copings were also treated mechanically by sandblasting, either alone or with acid etching or different primers. All specimens underwent thermal aging (10⁴ cycles, 5°C/55°C). The retention forces between the two parts were measured with a pull-off test. The results were analyzed by two-way ANOVA statistics. Fracture patterns were evaluated by light and scanning electron microscopy.

RESULTS

No mechanical pretreatment of the titanium (group 2) base resulted in the lowest retention. The combination with Monobond plus leads to the highest pull-off forces for both ceramic materials.

CONCLUSIONS

Surface modifications and resin-based agents influence the retention of components of two-part abutments. Lithium disilicate ceramic copings reached comparable results of retention to the typically used zirconia copings.

Effect of different surface treatment methods on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to temporary crowns

INTRODUCTION

The number of adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment has been consistently increasing. Since the placing of the final restoration must be postponed until the completion of the orthodontic treatment, provisional restoration is recommended for the duration of the orthodontic treatment. These surfaces have special chemical properties, which necessitate the orthodontists to prepare the bonding area with special measures.

METHODS

Polycarbonate and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) crowns (n=80) were randomly subdivided into 4 groups. Conditioning methods were grinding, sandblasting, CO₂ laser and methyl methacrylate application. Samples underwent SBS testing. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis was carried out. The data was analysed with ANOVA, Student t-test and Post-hoc test. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) was analysed with Chi² test.

RESULTS

In all surface treatments, the mean Shear Bond Strength (SBS) of PMMA was significantly higher than that of polycarbonate (P<0.001). In the polycarbonate groups, there was a significant difference between the mean SBS of the four treatment methods (P<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in PMMA group (P=0.076). In both crown materials, the mode of the failure was adhesive type, regardless of the conditioning method (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PMMAs rendered higher bond strength than polycarbonates. In PMMA, all the surface treatment methods resulted in acceptable bond strength. However, if bonding the brackets to polycarbonate crown is needed, other conditioning methods are preferred over CO₂ laser.

Evaluation of the effect of different surface conditioning methods on shear bond strength of metal brackets bonded to aged composite restorations

INTRODUCTION

There are controversies regarding the most reliable conditioning method of the aged composite surface to ensure optimum bond strength. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of metal brackets to microhybrid composite restorations after different surface preparation techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of sixty microhybrid composite samples were prepared using upper right central incisor celluloid crown as a mold. Samples were treated with 4 different surface conditioning methods: (1) etching, (2) sandblasting, (3) grinding, and (4) CO₂ laser irradiation. Samples were then bonded with metal brackets and underwent shear bond strength testing. A scanning electron microscope was carried out and the data was analysed by one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey test. Bond failure was examined by stereomicroscope and scored based on adhesive remnant index (ARI). Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare ARI values (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Shear bond strength values in the sandblasting group (17.18±1.53MPa) were significantly higher than the other groups. There was no significant difference between the grinding (12.87±3.38MPa) and laser (11.08±1.37MPa) groups (P=0.09). The lowest values were recorded in the etching group (6.78±1.69MPa). There was a significant difference in ARI scores among the four groups (P<0.001). ARI scores were mostly 2 and 3 in the sandblasting and grinding group, while in the etching and laser groups ARI was mostly 0 and 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Surface preparation by sandblasting and CO₂ laser provides clinically acceptable results with regards to bond strength and ARI score, however grinding and acid etching failed to produce the same results.

The influence of enamel sandblasting on the shear bond strength and fractography of the bracket-adhesive-enamel complex tested in vitro by the DIN 13990:2017-04 standard

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted in order to investigate whether enamel sandblasting as an adjunct or substitute to the acid-etch technique has an effect on the shear bond strength (SBS) and fractography of the bracket-adhesive-enamel complex using the DIN 13990:2017-04 standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Upper central incisor brackets (discovery®, Dentaurum, Germany) were bonded using Transbond XT™ (3M Unitek, Germany) on bovine incisors prepared by four different methods (15 samples each): sandblasting with 27 μm Al₂O₃ at 1.2 bar (s), acid etching with 37.4% phosphoric acid (a), sandblasting with 27 μm Al₂O₃ at 1.2 bar followed by acid etching (s1a), and sandblasting with 50 μm Al₂O₃ at 5.7 bar followed by acid etching (s2a). The SBS and adhesive remnant index (ARI) were measured, followed by one-way analysis of variance and Fisher's exact tests at 5%.

RESULTS

The SBS in groups s (5.6 ± 2.2 MPa), a (17.1 ± 4.3 MPa), s1a (18.3 ± 4.3 MPa), and s2a (18.5 ± 4.6 MPa) indicated that the s group was significantly inferior to all the other groups (p < 0.001). Likewise, the ARI analysis indicated a different performance of the s group (mostly ARI of 0) compared to the other groups (p < 0.001) and a tendency for different ARI between the a and s1a/s2a groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In vitro enamel sandblasting could not substitute acid etching and did not offer improved SBS when used before acid etching, regardless of air pressure and powder granulation. Sandblasting without acid etching produced less residual resin on the tooth after debonding.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The clinical use of adjunct enamel sandblasting prior to etching to enhance SBS has to be questioned.

Shear bond strength of metal brackets to ceramic surfaces using a universal bonding resin

Background

Assure Plus is a recently introduced universal adhesive with the ability to bond to various restorations. This study compared the shear bond strength of brackets bonded to two types of ceramics using conventional bonding agent and Assure Plus. Surface damage caused by debonding was also evaluated.

Material and Methods

In this in vitro study, 40 feldspathic and lithium disilicate ceramic discs were sandblasted, etched with 9.6% hydrofluoric acid and divided into two groups. In group 1, silane was applied and air-dried followed by application of Transbond XT primer, which was light-cured. In group 2, Assure Plus was applied and air-dried. In both groups, maxillary central incisor brackets were bonded. After incubation in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours and 2000 thermal cycles, bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine, and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) and failure modes were determined. ANOVA and LSD tests were used to compare bond strength values; chi-squared test was used to compare ARI scores.

Results

Bracket bond to lithium disilicate by Assure Plus was significantly stronger than that to Feldspathic porcelain (P=0.041). Only in the Assure Plus/lithium disilicate group did some adhesive remain on the surface following debonding (40% of samples, P<0.05). Cohesive porcelain fracture had the lowest frequency in the lithium disilicate/Assure Plus group.

Conclusions

Assure Plus provided high bond strength between ceramic and brackets and minimized damage to lithium disilicate ceramic during debonding. Assure Plus is recommended for use in orthodontic treatment of adults with ceramic restorations.

Key words:Adhesives, ceramics, dental bonding, shear bond strength.

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

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 Three Orthodontic Bonding Systems on Enamel and Restorative Materials

Objective. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) score of two self-etching no-mix adhesives (iBond™ and Scotchbond™) on different prosthetic surfaces and enamel, in comparison with the commonly used total etch system Transbond XT™. Materials and Methods. A total of 270 surfaces (1 enamel and 8 restorative surfaces, n = 30) were randomly divided into three adhesive groups. In group 1 (control) brackets were bonded with Transbond XT primer. In the experimental groups iBond adhesive (group 2) and Scotchbond Universal adhesive (group 3) were used. The SBS was measured using a Zwicki 1120™ testing machine. The ARI and SBS were compared statistically using the Kruskal–Wallis test (P ≤ 0.05). Results. Significant differences in SBS and ARI were found between the control group and experimental groups. Conclusions. Transbond XT showed the highest SBS on human enamel. Scotchbond Universal on average provides the best bonding on all other types of surface (metal, composite, and porcelain), with no need for additional primers. It might therefore be helpful for simplifying bonding in orthodontic procedures on restorative materials in patients. If metal brackets have to be bonded to a metal surface, the use of a dual-curing resin is recommended.