The effect of different porcelain conditioning techniques on shear bond strength of stainless steel brackets.
With the increasing demand for adult orthodontics, a growing need arises to bond attachments to porcelain surfaces. Optimal adhesion to a porcelain surface should allow orthodontic treatment without bond failure but not jeopardize porcelain integrity after debonding. In this study, 90 glazed porcelain facets were divided into three groups according to different conditioning techniques: (1) roughening with a coarse diamond; (2) hydrofluoric acid 8%; (3) microetching with 60 micron aluminum oxide particles. Each group was divided into three groups and stainless steel brackets were then bonded to the conditioned porcelain with three different dental adhesives. The adhesives used were: (1) silane+Right-On; (2) silane+Concise; (3) High-Q-Bond without silane. Four additional facets (three of which conditioned as above and one intact) were analyzed macroscopically and by scanning electron microscopy. Shear bond strength was measured with an Instron universal testing machine and a macroscopic examination of the debonded porcelain surfaces was performed. Results showed that shear bond strength was highly influenced by both conditioning technique and the adhesive. Shear bond strength of the High-Q-Bond groups was significantly lower than both the silane+Right-On and the silane+Concise groups; nevertheless the shear bond strength achieved by High-Q-Bond was enough to sustain full orthodontic treatment duration (except for the group conditioned by roughening with a coarse diamond). Scanning electronic microscopy analysis revealed that diamond roughening and microetching produced only a surface-peeling pattern, whereas hydrofluoric acid conditioning produced an extensive in-depth penetrating pattern. Hydrofluoric acid preparation produced greater shear bond strength than both diamond roughening and microetching. After debonding by means of a shearing force, the percentage of damaged porcelain surfaces in the silane+Concise groups was significantly higher than the silane+Right-On and High-Q-Bond groups.
Gillis
I
I
Department of Orthodontics, Hebrew University-Hadassah, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel.
Redlich
M
M
D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D000149:Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride; D000537:Aluminum Oxide; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D001840:Dental Bonding / Q000379:methods*; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D018130:Diamond; D006858:Hydrofluoric Acid; D008422:Materials Testing; D008689:Methacrylates; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D016910:Orthodontic Brackets; D019279:Resin Cements; D012821:Silanes; D013193:Stainless Steel; D013499:Surface Properties; D013718:Tensile Strength
D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C103360:High-Q-Bond; D008689:Methacrylates; D019279:Resin Cements; D012821:Silanes; D003776:Dental Porcelain; C071164:Right-On cement; D013193:Stainless Steel; D000149:Acidulated Phosphate Fluoride; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D018130:Diamond; D000537:Aluminum Oxide; D006858:Hydrofluoric Acid