A study of the mechanical properties of as-received and intraorally exposed single-crystal and polycrystalline orthodontic ceramic brackets

The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia: in vitro study

Objective: The present study aimed to assess the bond strength and durability of six bonding agents concerning their application to metal or ceramic brackets and zirconia. Materials and Methods: Six resin cement bonding agents (XT, XTS, RSBU, RGBU, SBPM, and GMP) were chosen for this investigation. Specimens were either stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h or subjected to 5,000 thermocycles before conducting a Shear Bond Strength (SBS) test. Statistical analysis of the SBS data was performed using three-way ANOVA and Games-Howell tests (α = 0.05). The Adhesive Remnant Index was examined, and the debonding surface details on brackets and zirconia were observed. Results: For metal brackets, all groups demonstrated clinically acceptable bond strength, irrespective of storage conditions, except for the XT group. Regarding ceramic brackets, all groups displayed acceptable bond strength after 24 h of water storage. However, following thermocycling, a significant decrease in SBS was noted across all groups (p < 0.05), with SBPM exhibiting a higher bond strength. Three-way ANOVA analysis indicated that SBS values were notably influenced by each factor, and an interaction among the three independent variables was observed (p = 0.000). Conclusion: The reliable bond strength between ceramic brackets and zirconia was significantly lower after thermocycling compared to that of metal brackets and zirconia. SBPM exhibited consistent and robust bond strength between ceramic/metal brackets and zirconia across various storage conditions. Furthermore, the HEMA-free adhesive demonstrated a potentially more consistent bonding performance compared to the HEMA-containing adhesive employed in this study.

Mechanical characterization of aesthetic orthodontic brackets by the dynamic indentation method

The objective of this study is to investigate the mechanical properties, such as the dynamic hardness and indentation elastic modulus, of commercially available aesthetic orthodontic brackets, such as ceramic and plastic brackets, by the dynamic micro-indentation method. Five ceramic brackets, which were made of alumina (both monocrystalline and polycrystalline forms) or zirconia, and two plastic brackets, which were made of glass fiber-reinforced polycarbonate or polyamide, were tested. There were significant differences in the mechanical properties of the monocrystalline and polycrystalline alumina brackets. The mechanical properties of the glass fiber-reinforced plastic bracket were significantly superior to these of the non-glass-fiber-reinforced plastic bracket. The differences in the crystal structures of the ceramic brackets surface affected the dynamic hardness and indentation elastic modulus. Furthermore, the short glass fibers contained in the plastic bracket might contribute to the improvement of the mechanical properties.

Shear Bond Strength and Bracket Base Morphology of New and Rebonded Orthodontic Ceramic Brackets

The objectives of this study were to (1) to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of two ceramic brackets when new and when rebonded following various bracket base conditioning methods, and (2) to determine bond failure mode relative to bracket base morphology. 100 Symetri Clear^TM (SC) and 100 Radiance Plus^® (RP) ceramic brackets were bonded to bovine incisors and divided into five groups: one group served as controls and four had brackets rebonded following conditioning by: no surface treatment, sealant, sandblasting, and flame then steam. SBS, adhesive remnant index, and bracket base morphology were evaluated. SBS showed no statistical difference between new and rebonded with no surface treatment or sealant (SC brackets) and with sealant or flame and steam (RP brackets). When comparing SC to RP, SBS was higher with SC, no surface treatment, and sandblasted groups. All groups had varying amounts of adhesive left on the tooth, with the sandblasted group having the most. SEM analysis showed that sandblasting damaged the retention features of bracket bases. In conclusion, when rebonded, the SBS of SC brackets that had no surface treatment and both SC and RP brackets that had sealant showed no significant differences to new brackets. Sandblasting damaged the retention features of SC and RP bracket bases, resulting in low SBS.

Pain and removal force associated with bracket debonding: a clinical study

Objective:

Pain is a problem during bracket removal, and more comfortable treatment is needed. This study examined the association of pain with the removal force required for ceramic brackets, compared with metal and plastic brackets, to determine which removal method resulted in less pain and discomfort.

Methodology:

81 subjects (mean age, 25.1 years; 25 males and 56 females) were enrolled, from whom 1,235 brackets (407 ceramic, 432 plastic, and 396 metal) were removed. Measured teeth were distinguished at six segments. Pain was measured with a visual analogue scale (VAS) during the removal of each bracket. An additional grip was placed on the grips of debonding pliers with right-angled beaks; a mini loading cell sensor pinched by the grips was used to measure removal force during debonding. VAS and force values were statistically analyzed. The Kruskal–Wallis test followed by the Mann–Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction were performed for multiple comparisons; multiple regression analysis was also performed.

Results:

Forces in the upper and lower anterior segments were significantly smaller (p<0.05) than those in the other segments. Pain tended to be greater in the upper and lower anterior segments than in the posterior segments. In all segments, the removal force was greater for metal brackets than for plastic or ceramic brackets. Ceramic brackets caused significantly greater pain than plastic brackets for the upper and lower anterior segments. Debonding force was involved in the brackets, following adjustments for pain, upper left segment, age, and sex.

Conclusions

Pain and discomfort are likely to occur during bracket debonding.

Can the chlorhexidine gluconate solution potentiate the staining of polycrystalline ceramic brackets?

Aim: The present study aimed to assess, in vitro, the effect of chlorhexidine on the potentiation of polycrystalline ceramic bracket staining. Methods: Seventy-two polycrystalline ceramic brackets of upper right central incisors were divided into six groups (n=12) according to immersion solution. The groups were G1 - distilled water (control); G2 - chlorhexidine; G3 - coffee; G4 - red wine; G5 - chlorhexidine associated with coffee; and G6 - chlorhexidine associated with red wine. The samples were analyzed by means of a spectrophotometer according to the CIEL*a*b* system, and color change (ΔE*) was calculated. The readings were performed at the following times: T0 - After package removal and T1 - After staining. The data were analyzed by Kruskal Wallis and t tests (p<0.05) at 5% significance level. Results: The total color variation (ΔE*) was greater in the group that received chlorhexidine associated with red wine (p<0.05) and lower in the groups that received distilled water. All other groups showed greater value variations when compared to G1 and G2. Group G6 showed a greater color change due to the potentiation of chlorhexidine with the dye substance. Conclusion: It is concluded that chlorhexidine potentiates the staining caused by red wine in polycrystalline ceramic brackets.