Bond Strength and Surface Roughness of Two Ceramics After Metal Bracket Debonding.

IF 0.8 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Luciana P B Arcas, Kusai Baroudi, Caroline A B de Matos, Fabiana C Ribeiro, Laís R Silva-Concílio, Marina Amaral
{"title":"Bond Strength and Surface Roughness of Two Ceramics After Metal Bracket Debonding.","authors":"Luciana P B Arcas,&nbsp;Kusai Baroudi,&nbsp;Caroline A B de Matos,&nbsp;Fabiana C Ribeiro,&nbsp;Laís R Silva-Concílio,&nbsp;Marina Amaral","doi":"10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aims of this study were to compare the bond strength between metallic brackets and two different glass ceramics and to evaluate the ceramic surface roughness after different finishing protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The surface roughness of lithium disilicate and resin matrix ceramic samples was measured (initial). All samples were treated with hydrofluoric acid and silane and bonded to metallic brackets with orthodontic cement adhesive. Shear bond strength tests were performed using a universal testing machine (n=12). The surface roughness was measured again (intermediate, n=6) after removing the remaining cement adhesive from the ceramic surfaces with a diamond or 24-blade bur after polishing the ceramic surfaces (final, n=6).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The resin matrix ceramic had the highest bond strength. The rotatory instrument used for the removal of cement adhesive did not affect the surface roughness of the resin matrix ceramic or lithium disilicate (p=0.985 and p=0.504, respectively), but did affect the evaluation time (p<0.001) for both restorative materials. The intermediate roughness was the highest. For the resin matrix ceramic, polishing promoted a final surface roughness similar to the initial condition; however, changes in the surface shape of this ceramic could be visibly observed when using a 24-blade bur.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The bond strength of metallic brackets bonded on resin-matrix ceramics is higher than bonding on lithium disilicate. The use of diamond burs for the removal of the remaining adhesive from the resin matrix ceramics is highly recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":37013,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"36 3","pages":"194-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d3/1f/tjo-36-194.PMC10548060.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aims of this study were to compare the bond strength between metallic brackets and two different glass ceramics and to evaluate the ceramic surface roughness after different finishing protocols.

Methods: The surface roughness of lithium disilicate and resin matrix ceramic samples was measured (initial). All samples were treated with hydrofluoric acid and silane and bonded to metallic brackets with orthodontic cement adhesive. Shear bond strength tests were performed using a universal testing machine (n=12). The surface roughness was measured again (intermediate, n=6) after removing the remaining cement adhesive from the ceramic surfaces with a diamond or 24-blade bur after polishing the ceramic surfaces (final, n=6).

Results: The resin matrix ceramic had the highest bond strength. The rotatory instrument used for the removal of cement adhesive did not affect the surface roughness of the resin matrix ceramic or lithium disilicate (p=0.985 and p=0.504, respectively), but did affect the evaluation time (p<0.001) for both restorative materials. The intermediate roughness was the highest. For the resin matrix ceramic, polishing promoted a final surface roughness similar to the initial condition; however, changes in the surface shape of this ceramic could be visibly observed when using a 24-blade bur.

Conclusion: The bond strength of metallic brackets bonded on resin-matrix ceramics is higher than bonding on lithium disilicate. The use of diamond burs for the removal of the remaining adhesive from the resin matrix ceramics is highly recommended.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

金属支架脱粘后两种陶瓷的结合强度和表面粗糙度。
目的:本研究的目的是比较金属托槽与两种不同玻璃陶瓷之间的结合强度,并评估不同抛光方案后的陶瓷表面粗糙度。方法:测量二硅酸锂和树脂基陶瓷样品的表面粗糙度(初始)。所有样本都用氢氟酸和硅烷处理,并用正畸水泥粘合剂粘合到金属托槽上。使用通用试验机(n=12)进行剪切结合强度试验。在抛光陶瓷表面(最终,n=6)后,用金刚石或24刀片钻头从陶瓷表面去除剩余的水泥粘合剂后,再次测量表面粗糙度(中间,n=6。)。结果:树脂基陶瓷具有最高的结合强度。用于去除水泥粘合剂的旋转仪器不影响树脂基质陶瓷或二硅酸锂的表面粗糙度(分别为p=0.985和p=0.504),但确实影响了评估时间(P结论:金属支架与树脂基陶瓷的结合强度高于与二硅酸锂的结合强度。强烈建议使用金刚石钻头去除树脂基陶瓷中残留的粘合剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Orthodontics
Turkish Journal of Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信