共 50 条
Bond Strength of Metallic or Ceramic Orthodontic Brackets to Enamel, Acrylic, or Porcelain Surfaces
被引:22
|作者:
Pinho, Monica
[1
]
Manso, Maria C.
[1
,2
,3
]
Almeida, Ricardo Faria
[4
]
Martin, Conchita
[5
]
Carvalho, Oscar
[6
]
Henriques, Bruno
[6
,7
]
Silva, Filipe
[6
]
Ferreira, Afonso Pinhao
[4
]
Souza, Julio C. M.
[6
,8
]
机构:
[1] Univ Fernando Pessoa UFP, Fac Hlth Sci FCS, P-4249004 Porto, Portugal
[2] Univ Fernando Pessoa UFP, Environm & Hlth Res Unit FP ENAS, Fernando Pessoa Energy, P-4200150 Porto, Portugal
[3] Univ Porto UP, REQUIMTE, LAQV, P-4050313 Porto, Portugal
[4] Univ Porto UP, Sch Dent FMDUP, P-4200135 Porto, Portugal
[5] Univ Complutense Madrid UCM, Sch Dent, Madrid 28040, Spain
[6] Univ Minho, Ctr MicroElectromech Syst CMEMS UMINHO, P-4800058 Guimaraes, Portugal
[7] Fed Univ Santa Catarina UFSC, Dept Mech Engn EMC, BR-88040090 Florianopolis, SC, Brazil
[8] Univ Inst Hlth Sci IUCS, Dept Dent Sci, CESPU, P-4585116 Gandra Prd, Portugal
来源:
关键词:
shear bond strength;
tensile bond strength;
orthodontic brackets;
adhesion;
LASER;
MICROSTRUCTURE;
DENTISTRY;
ADHESION;
CEMENT;
FORCE;
D O I:
10.3390/ma13225197
中图分类号:
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号:
070304 ;
081704 ;
摘要:
Bonding strategies within different brackets and dental materials are still a challenge concerning adhesion and dental surface damage. This study compared the shear and tensile bond strength of orthodontic ceramic and metallic brackets to enamel, acrylic, and ceramic surfaces after thermal cycling. Dental surfaces were divided into three groups: enamel, ceramic, and acrylic. Each group received stainless-steel and ceramic brackets. After thermal cycling, specimens were randomly divided into two subgroups considering tensile (TBS) or shear bond strength (SBS) test. After the mechanical testing, scanning electron and optical microscopy were performed, and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) was determined. The two-way ANOVA full factorial design was used to compare TBS, SBS, and ARI on the surface and bracket type (alpha = 0.05). There were significant differences in TBS, SBS, and ARI values per surface (p < 0.001 and p = 0.009) and type of bracket (p = 0.025 and p = 0.001). The highest mean SBS values were recorded for a ceramic bracket bonded to an acrylic surface (8.4 +/- 2.3 MPa). For TBS, a ceramic bracket bonded to acrylic showed the worst performance (5.2 +/- 1.8 MPa) and the highest values were found on a metallic bracket bonded to enamel. The adhesion of metallic or ceramic brackets is enough for clinical practice although the damage of the enamel surface after debonding is irreversible and harmful for the aesthetic outcome of the teeth.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 16
页数:15
相关论文