The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Evaluation of Clear Aligner Attachments Bonded to Lithium Disilicate Ceramic Prepared with Different Surface Roughening Methods: An In Vitro Study

Abdullah M Fayyadh, Mohammed A Elbialy, Marwa A Tawfik

Keywords : Clear aligner, Composite attachment, Lithium disilicate, Shear bond

Citation Information : Fayyadh AM, Elbialy MA, Tawfik MA. Evaluation of Clear Aligner Attachments Bonded to Lithium Disilicate Ceramic Prepared with Different Surface Roughening Methods: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (8):766-771.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3740

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 26-11-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: This study aims to assess the effects of surface conditioning and different composite types on the surface roughness (SR) and shear bond strength (SBS) between lithium disilicate and clear aligner composite attachments. Materials and methods: Eighty ivoclar vivadent pressable (IPS) e.max press specimens were randomly allocated into four groups (n = 20) based on the surface treatment method employed. Group I: Used sandblasting with 50 μm Al2O3 slurry particles; group II: Used 9.5% hydrofluoric acid (HFA); group III: Used 37% phosphoric acid (PhA); and group IV: Used an Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Surface roughness was measured using a stylus profilometer. For SBS, each group was split into two subgroups based on the composite type (n = 10): FiltekTM Z350 supreme ultra flowable and FiltekTM Z350. The evaluation of SBS was conducted using Instron universal testing equipment. Results: The results indicated that the sandblasting group gave the highest mean surface roughness, while the 37% PhA group showed the lowest recorded value. In addition, the HFA group had the highest mean SBS, while the 37% PhA group demonstrated the lowest SBS. Conclusion: The interaction of HFA and FiltekTM Z350 demonstrated the highest SBS, followed by sandblasting and FiltekTM Z350. Clinical significance: The current study may guide orthodontists to choose the appropriate composite material and conditioning technique to achieve a strong SBS between clear aligner composite attachments and lithium disilicate ceramic.

PDF Share
  1. Casteluci CEVF, Oltramari PVP, Conti PCR, et al. Evaluation of pain intensity in patients treated with aligners and conventional fixed appliances: Randomized clinical trial. Orthod Craniofac Res 2021;24(2):268–276. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12431.
  2. Fujiyama K, Honjo T, Suzuki M, et al. Analysis of pain level in cases treated with Invisalign aligner: Comparison with fixed edgewise appliance therapy. Prog Orthod 2014;15:1–7. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-014-0064-7.
  3. Papadimitriou A, Mousoulea S, Gkantidis N, et al. Clinical effectiveness of Invisalign® orthodontic treatment: A systematic review. Prog Orthod 2018;19:1–24. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-018-0235-z.
  4. JJ S. Essix retainers: Fabrication and supervision for permanent retention. J Clin Orthod 1993;27:37–45. PMID: 8478438.
  5. Krieger E, Seiferth J, Marinello I, et al. Invisalign® treatment in the anterior region. J Orofac Orthoped 2012;1–12. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-012-0097-9.
  6. Putrino A, Barbato E, Galluccio G. Clear aligners: Between evolution and efficiency—A scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18(6):2870. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18062870.
  7. Viskic J, Jokic D, Jakovljevic S, et al. Scanning electron microscope comparative surface evaluation of glazed-lithium disilicate ceramics under different irradiation settings of Nd: YAG and Er: YAG lasers. Angle Orthod 2018;88(1):75–81. DOI: 10.2319/062017-408.1.
  8. Newman SM, Dressler KB, Grenadier MR. Direct bonding of orthodontic brackets to esthetic restorative materials using a silane. Am J Orthod 1984;86(6):503–506. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9416(84)90356-7.
  9. Zachrisson YØ, Zachrisson BU, Büyükyilmaz T. Surface preparation for orthodontic bonding to porcelain. Am J Orthodon Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109(4):420–430. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(96)70124-5.
  10. Kukiattrakoon B, Samruajbenjakul B. Shear bond strength of ceramic brackets with various base designs bonded to aluminous and fluorapatite ceramics. Euro J Orthod 2010;32(1):87–93. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjp055.
  11. Meng X, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Microshear bond strength of resin bonding systems to machinable ceramic with different surface treatments. J Adhes Dent 2008;10(3). PMID: 18652267.
  12. Borges GA, Sophr AM, De Goes MF, et al. Effect of etching and airborne particle abrasion on the microstructure of different dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89(5):479–488. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(02)52704-9.
  13. Amaral R, Özcan M, Bottino MA, et al. Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to glass infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic: The effect of surface conditioning. Dental Materials 2006;22(3):283–290. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.021.
  14. Ergun Kunt G, Duran I. Effects of laser treatments on surface roughness of zirconium oxide ceramics. BMC Oral Health 2018;18:1–7. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0688-y.
  15. Bayraktar Y, Arslan M, Demirtag Z. Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin-ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments. Microsc Res Tech 2021;84(6):1145–1154. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23672.
  16. Kasraei S, Rezaei-Soufi L, Heidari B, et al. Bond strength of resin cement to CO2 and Er: YAG laser-treated zirconia ceramic. Restor Dent Endod 2014;39(4):296–302. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2014.39.4.296.
  17. Alsaud BA, Hajjaj MS, Masoud AI, et al. Bonding of clear aligner composite attachments to ceramic materials: An in vitro study. Materials 2022;15(12):4145. DOI: 10.3390/ma15124145.
  18. Kurt İ, Çehreli ZC, Özçırpıcı AA, Şar Ç. Biomechanical evaluation between orthodontic attachment and three different materials after various surface treatments: A three-dimensional optical profilometry analysis. Angle Orthod 2019;89(5):742–750. DOI: 10.2319/072918-547.1.
  19. Daou EE. Esthetic prosthetic restorations: Reliability and effects on antagonist dentition. Open Dent J 2015;9:473. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601509010473.
  20. Gillis I, Redlich M. The effect of different porcelain conditioning techniques on shear bond strength of stainless steel brackets. Am J of Orthodon Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114(4):387–392. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70183-0.
  21. Abu Alhaija ESJ, Al-Wahadni AMS. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to different ceramic surfaces. E J Orthodon 2007;29(4):386–389. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjm032.
  22. Bayoumi RE, El-Kabbany SM, Gad N. Effect of different surface treatment modalities on surface roughness and shear bond strength of orthodontic molar tubes to lithium disilicate ceramics. Egypt Dent J. 2019;65:641–656. DOI: 10.21608/edj.2019.72822.
  23. Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S, Cengiz E, Ongun S, et al. The effect of surface treatments on the mechanical and optical behaviors of CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Prosthodontics. 2019;28(2):e496–e503. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12749.
  24. Augusti D, Gabriele A, Francesca C, et al. Does sandblasting improve bond strength between nano-ceramic resin and two different luting composites. Bioceram Dev Appl 2015;5(86):2. DOI: 10.4172/2090-5025.1000086.
  25. Keshvad A, Hakimaneh SMR. Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to silica-based and Y-TZP ceramics using different surface treatments. J Prosthodont 2018;27(1):67–74. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12622.
  26. Chen JH, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Effect of etchant, etching period, and silane priming on bond strength to porcelain of composite resin. Oper Dent 1998;23:250–257. PMID: 9863446.
  27. Prochnow C, Venturini AB, Grasel R, et al. Effect of etching with distinct hydrofluoric acid concentrations on the flexural strength of a lithium disilicate-based glass ceramic. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2017;105(4):885–891.
  28. Chen W, Qian L, Qian Y, et al. Comparative study of three composite materials in bonding attachments for clear aligners. Orthod Craniofac Res 2021;24(4):520–527. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12465.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.