Shear bond strength of different bonding agents to orthodontic metal bracket and zirconia

Hu, Bo; HU, Yichun; LI, Xiangyi; GAO, Jiayang; Sun, Ruitong; Zhan, Desong; Sano, Hidehiko; FU, Jiale

doi:10.4012/dmj.2022-028

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…HEMA’s role in enhancing component miscibility and forming a uniform adhesive layer could explain RSBU’s superiority ( Toledano et al, 2001 ; Moszner et al, 2005 ; Van Landuyt et al, 2005 ), despite its decreased SBS post-thermocycling. However, RGBU’s hydrophobic nature prevented water absorption, resulting in more stable bonding durability, aligning with earlier findings ( Hu et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia: in vitro study

Hu,

Gao,

Huang

et al. 2024

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study aimed to assess the bond strength and durability of six bonding agents concerning their application to metal or ceramic brackets and zirconia.Materials and Methods: Six resin cement bonding agents (XT, XTS, RSBU, RGBU, SBPM, and GMP) were chosen for this investigation. Specimens were either stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h or subjected to 5,000 thermocycles before conducting a Shear Bond Strength (SBS) test. Statistical analysis of the SBS data was performed using three-way ANOVA and Games-Howell tests (α = 0.05). The Adhesive Remnant Index was examined, and the debonding surface details on brackets and zirconia were observed.Results: For metal brackets, all groups demonstrated clinically acceptable bond strength, irrespective of storage conditions, except for the XT group. Regarding ceramic brackets, all groups displayed acceptable bond strength after 24 h of water storage. However, following thermocycling, a significant decrease in SBS was noted across all groups (p < 0.05), with SBPM exhibiting a higher bond strength. Three-way ANOVA analysis indicated that SBS values were notably influenced by each factor, and an interaction among the three independent variables was observed (p = 0.000).Conclusion: The reliable bond strength between ceramic brackets and zirconia was significantly lower after thermocycling compared to that of metal brackets and zirconia. SBPM exhibited consistent and robust bond strength between ceramic/metal brackets and zirconia across various storage conditions. Furthermore, the HEMA-free adhesive demonstrated a potentially more consistent bonding performance compared to the HEMA-containing adhesive employed in this study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Conversely, RGBU’s SBS remained stable in metal brackets group, indicating its resistance to water-induced degradation. Therefore, Three-way ANOVA demonstrated a statistically significant interaction among bonding agents, storage conditions and brackets ( p < 0.001), which was not detected in previous experiment ( Hu et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 65%

The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia: in vitro study

Hu,

Gao,

Huang

et al. 2024

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The bond strength of the bracket to the tooth surface depends on many factors. The most important are study design [ 21 , 22 ], the material from which the bracket was made [ 23 – 25 ], the type of surface [ 26 ], the type of adhesive polymerization [ 27 ], and the etching procedure [ 28 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Onto the Tooth Enamel of 120 Freshly Extracted Adult Bovine Medial Lower Incisors Using 4 Adhesives: A Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Adhesive, a Composite Adhesive, a Liquid Composite Adhesive, and a One-Step Light-Cured Adhesive

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to compare the bond strength of orthodontic brackets onto the tooth enamel of 120 freshly extracted adult bovine medial lower incisors using 4 adhesives: a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive, a composite adhesive, a liquid composite adhesive, and a one-step light-cured adhesive. Material/Methods The study group (120 freshly extracted bovine medial lower incisors) was divided into equal subgroups depending on the type of adhesive used to fix the brackets to the tooth enamel (n=30), and then according to the observation time (n=10). Orthodontic brackets were fixed onto the tooth enamel for 24 hours (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3) using 4 types of adhesives: resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive Fuji Ortho LC, composite adhesive Transbond Plus Light Cure Band, flowable composite adhesive Transbond Supreme Low Viscosity, and a one-step light-cured adhesive GC Ortho Connect. Shear tests and fracture plane analyses were performed. Results Statistically significant differences at time T1 were noted in the comparison of shear stress values when brackets were fixed with GC Ortho Connect adhesive compared to other adhesives ( P <0.05), except for the Transbond Plus adhesive ( P >0.05). At time T3, significant statistical differences occurred between GC Fuji Ortho LC and the other 3 adhesives ( P <0.05). The fracture analysis showed that, regardless of the time function, adhesive-cohesive fractures without damage to the enamel were the most common for all the assessed materials. Conclusions Of the adhesives evaluated, GC Ortho Connect appears to be the most appropriate choice for bonding orthodontic brackets to the enamel surface.

show abstract

“…Because the demand for orthodontic treatment in adults has increased, the orthodontic brackets frequently need to be bonded to enamel and different types of ceramic restorations, including zirconia [ 5 , 6 ]. However, there is a higher occurrence of debonding between orthodontic brackets and zirconia restorations compared with bonding to enamel [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical and chemical surface treatment enhances bond strength between zirconia and orthodontic brackets: an in vitro study

Limpuangthip,

Surintanasarn,

Vitavaspan

2023

BDJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess the shear bond strength (SBS) between metal orthodontic brackets and zirconia after receiving different mechanical and chemical surface treatments, and different types of resin adhesive. The failure mode of each treatment protocol was also evaluated. Materials and methods The present in vitro experimental study consisted of six surface treatment protocols with two different resin adhesives. One-hundred and forty-four rectangular-shaped 3 mol% yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal blocks were milled, sintered, and embedded in acrylic resin. They were randomly divided into three mechanical (none, air abrasion, and bur grinding) and two chemical surface treatment conditions (no primer and Z-primer). The specimens were divided into two groups according to the resin adhesive received: self-cured (RelyX U200) and light-cured adhesives (Transbond XT). The SBS between the metal bracket and zirconia was tested using a universal testing machine (1-mm/min crosshead speed), and the failure mode was evaluated. Differences in SBS and failure mode were analyzed using Welch ANOVA followed by post-hoc comparison and Fisher’s Exact test, respectively. Results Bur grinding produced the highest SBS, followed by air abrasion. Z-primer application typically provided a higher SBS regardless of resin adhesive used (p < 0.001). Without primer application, RelyX U200 provided a higher SBS than Transbond XT (p < 0.001). After grinding, using Z-primer and RelyX U200 resulted in a higher SBS than no primer and using Transbond XT (p < 0.001). Adhesive failure at the zirconia–adhesive interface occurred only when Transbond XT was applied without bur grinding, and when using Transbond XT after grinding, but no Z-primer application. Conclusion Bur grinding combined with applying an MDP-containing primer and resin adhesive enhances the SBS between zirconia and metal orthodontic brackets.

show abstract

Shear bond strength of different bonding agents to orthodontic metal bracket and zirconia

Cited by 5 publications

References 39 publications

The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia: in vitro study

The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia: in vitro study

Comparison of Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Onto the Tooth Enamel of 120 Freshly Extracted Adult Bovine Medial Lower Incisors Using 4 Adhesives: A Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Adhesive, a Composite Adhesive, a Liquid Composite Adhesive, and a One-Step Light-Cured Adhesive

Mechanical and chemical surface treatment enhances bond strength between zirconia and orthodontic brackets: an in vitro study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About