Ghozy Eglal Ahmed, Shamaa Marwa Sameh, El-Bialy Ahmed A
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Egypt.
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2020 Fall;14(4):239-243. doi: 10.34172/joddd.2020.042. Epub 2020 Oct 24.
The present study aimed to evaluate the bond strength of metal bracket (MB) and ceramic bracket (CB) bonded to different CAD/CAM ceramic substrates etched with hydrofluoric acid (HFA) vs. phosphoric acid (PA). A total of 120 CAD/CAM ceramic blocks in 12 groups were fabricated from three different CAD/CAM ceramic materials: VITABLOCS Mark II, VITAENAMIC, and IPS e.max CAD. Each ceramic material group was divided into two etching groups: one treated with 9.5% HFA and the other treated with 37%. Sixty metal and CBs of the upper right central incisor were bonded to the HFA-treated blocks. Another 60 metal and CBs were bonded to the PA treated blocks. All the bonded specimens were thermocycled before shear bond strength (SBS) testing. Then the bond failure mode was recorded There were no significant differences in SBS values between the three CAD/CAM ceramic materials. The HFA-treated specimens exhibited significantly higher SBS values than the PA-treated specimens. Also, the SBS values of CBs were significantly higher than the metal brackets (MBs). The adhesive remnant index (ARI) score was 4 for most of the groups, indicating that almost no adhesive remained on the porcelain surface. The CAD/CAM ceramic type did not influence SBS; however, HFA exhibited significantly higher SBS compared to PA.
本研究旨在评估金属托槽(MB)和陶瓷托槽(CB)与经氢氟酸(HFA)和磷酸(PA)蚀刻的不同CAD/CAM陶瓷基底的粘结强度。用三种不同的CAD/CAM陶瓷材料:VITABLOCS Mark II、VITAENAMIC和IPS e.max CAD制作了12组共120个CAD/CAM陶瓷块。每个陶瓷材料组分为两个蚀刻组:一组用9.5%的HFA处理,另一组用37%的HFA处理。将右上中切牙的60个金属托槽和陶瓷托槽粘结到经HFA处理的块体上。另外60个金属托槽和陶瓷托槽粘结到经PA处理的块体上。所有粘结标本在进行剪切粘结强度(SBS)测试前进行热循环。然后记录粘结失败模式。三种CAD/CAM陶瓷材料之间的SBS值没有显著差异。经HFA处理的标本的SBS值显著高于经PA处理的标本。此外,陶瓷托槽的SBS值显著高于金属托槽(MB)。大多数组的粘结剂残留指数(ARI)评分为4,表明几乎没有粘结剂残留在瓷表面。CAD/CAM陶瓷类型不影响SBS;然而,与PA相比,HFA的SBS显著更高。