Impact of different pretreatments and attachment materials on shear bond strength between monolithic zirconia restorations and metal brackets

Jungbauer, Rebecca; Proff, Peter; Edelhoff, Daniel; Stawarczyk, Bogna

doi:10.1038/s41598-022-12542-5

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the appropriate method for conducting ceramic surface treatment in clinical practice has been a topic of discussion. Although many alternatives have been recommended for bracket bonding to LD and MZ ceramics, 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 there are limited data on aligner attachment bonding to different ceramics. In a recent study, the use of an all-in-one universal bonding agent and a high-viscosity universal composite after air abrasion resulted in the highest SBS values for attachment bonding to LD ceramics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can a Self-etching Primer be Effective in Bonding Aligner Attachments to Different Types of Ceramics?

Çokakoğlu,

Nalçacı,

Altıntaş

et al. 2024

TurkJOrthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of pretreatment with a self-etching primer for bonding aligner attachments to lithium disilicate (LD) and monolithic zirconia (MZ) ceramics. Methods: Forty ceramics, including LD (n=20) and MZ (n=20), were divided into four study groups according to the surface pretreatments: LD specimens pretreated with universal primer (Monobond Plus, MP) after hydrofluoric acid etching (Group 1); MZ ceramics pretreated with MP after sandblasting (Group 2); LD ceramics pretreated with self-etching ceramic primer (Monobond etch & prime, MEP) (Group 3); and MZ ceramics pretreated with MEP after sandblasting (Group 4). The aligner composite (GC Aligner Connect) and universal adhesive (GPremio Bond) were used to prepare the resin attachments. The bond strength was evaluated by micro-shear bond strength (SBS) testing (0.1 mm/min) after thermocycling, and the remnant adhesive was scored according to the resin attachment remnant index (RARI). The SBS data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey tests, and the RARI scores were analyzed using the chi-square test. Results: Group 1 had the lowest SBS, and group 2 had the highest SBS. There were significant differences between the groups in terms of bond strength (p<0.05). The RARI scores showed no significant differences, regardless of the pretreatment and ceramic type. Conclusion: The use of a self-etching primer increased the bond strength of resin attachments on LD ceramics. For zirconia ceramics, both ceramic primers are recommended for aligner attachment bonding.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can a Self-etching Primer be Effective in Bonding Aligner Attachments to Different Types of Ceramics?

Çokakoğlu,

Nalçacı,

Altıntaş

et al. 2024

TurkJOrthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently, there is a growing demand for orthodontic treatment among the adult population. Zirconia, particularly translucent 4Y-TZP ceramics and 5Y-TZP ceramics, known as monolithic restorations, are increasingly used in dentistry due to their improved esthetics and high durability [ 10 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. However, achieving an ideal bond strength with extremely hard and durable monolithic zirconia remains challenging in adult orthodontic treatment [ 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These methods include mechanical modification of the zirconia surface by removing the glaze layer and roughening the surface through sandblasting, grinding or laser etching. However, these methods may lead to irreversible damage or fractures during bracket removal [ 10 , 11 ]. Laser etching, particularly using Er:YAG lasers, has shown promise in roughening the zirconia surface and enhancing micromechanical retention without altering the zirconia structure or causing micro-cracks [ 3 , 7 , 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shear Bond Strength between Orthodontic Brackets and Monolithic 4Y-TZP: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between metal orthodontic brackets and monolithic zirconia surfaces bonded with resin composite. Fifty monolithic zirconia (4Y-TZP) disks were sintered and glazed. Specimens were divided into five groups (n = 10) for different surface treatments: control, nano second fiber laser, sandblasting, grinding and tribochemical coating (CoJet Sand 30-μm). Metal orthodontic brackets were bonded to monolithic zirconia surface by two-component orthodontic adhesive. After 500 cycles of thermocycling, shear bond strength values were measured by a universal testing machine at a cross head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data was recorded as MPa and statistically analyzed with One-way ANOVA, Levene’s LSD tests with Bonferroni corrections. The significance level was α = 0.05. The surface topography of one specimen of each group was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistically significant difference was observed among study groups (p = 0.018). The lowest shear bond strength was observed in the control group (3.92 ± 1.9). Tribochemical coating showed the highest bond strength (7.44 ± 2.9), which was statistically different from the control and nano second laser (4.3 ± 1.4) groups but not statistically different from grinding (6.15 ± 3.1) or sandblasting (6.47 ± 3.3). SEM images showed comprehensive results of each surface treatment on monolithic zirconia. All failure modes were recorded as adhesive between the composite resin and monolithic zirconia. Based on the findings of this study, it can be concluded that grinding, sandblasting and tribochemical coating techniques showed clinically acceptable bond strength within the range of 6–8 MPa. These surface treatments can be considered suitable for achieving a durable bond between metal orthodontic brackets and monolithic 4Y-TZP ceramic surfaces.

show abstract

“…Bonding orthodontic brackets on zirconia restorations is still a clinical challenge. Pretreatment with silica-coated alumina and applying RelyX or Clearfill ceramic primer provided sufficiently high shear bond strength values [ 37 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Bond Strength: Conventional and Self-Ligating

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adhesion remains a key element in dentistry, whether approached in prosthetics, odontology, or orthodontics. It is a continuously researched aspect, as improved materials and adhesive methods keep emerging in the market. No orthodontic treatment can be effective without the proper adhesion strength of the bonded elements on the teeth. The objective of this research, in the broad context of self-ligating versus conventional brackets, was to compare active and passive self-ligating systems with a conventional one by conducting an in vitro study on human-extracted premolars. Shear bond strength tests were executed by means of an advanced materials-testing machine that generated maximum load and tensile strength values. The data obtained underwent statistical analysis with a statistical threshold of p < 0.05. The results regarding the statistical significance were acquired when comparing the passive self-ligating system with the active self-ligating and conventional systems (load-at-maximum-load mean 204.9, SD 91.09, and p < 0.05). In this study, the passive self-ligating bracket system appears to present increased shear bond strength.

show abstract

Impact of different pretreatments and attachment materials on shear bond strength between monolithic zirconia restorations and metal brackets

Cited by 5 publications

References 39 publications

Can a Self-etching Primer be Effective in Bonding Aligner Attachments to Different Types of Ceramics?

Can a Self-etching Primer be Effective in Bonding Aligner Attachments to Different Types of Ceramics?

Shear Bond Strength between Orthodontic Brackets and Monolithic 4Y-TZP: An In Vitro Study

Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Bond Strength: Conventional and Self-Ligating

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About