An investigation into the bonding of orthodontic attachments to porcelain.Eur J Orthod. 2006 Feb; 28(1):74-7.EJ
This study assessed bonding of orthodontic brackets to porcelain teeth using two different surface preparation techniques and comparing two bonding systems, Fuji Ortho L.C. and Transbond. Four groups of 20 porcelain premolar teeth were bonded with metal orthodontic brackets (0.022 inch Minitwin, 3M Unitek) according to the following protocol: Transbond with a phosphoric acid etch (group 1), Transbond with a hydrofluoric acid etch (group 2), Fuji Ortho L.C. with a hydrofluoric acid etch (group 3), and Fuji Ortho L.C. with a phosphoric acid etch (group 4). All groups were bonded with a silane coupling agent. The teeth were debonded with an Instron universal testing machine. Bond strength, site of bond failure and adhesive remnant index (ARI) were recorded for each group. Differences between groups were analysed statistically. The composite resin groups (groups 1 and 2) had the highest mean bond strength values at 7.9 and 9.7 MPa, respectively. The resin-modified glass ionomer cement groups (RMGIC; groups 3 and 4) had the lowest mean bond strength values at 6.3 and 1.8 MPa, respectively. The mean bond strength of group 3 was significantly lower than all other groups (P < 0.0001). The Fuji groups had also significantly (P < 0.001) lower ARI scores than the composite groups (groups 1 and 2). Most samples experienced porcelain surface damage, except group 4. In conclusion, the highest bond strength levels were achieved with a conventional composite resin cement (groups 1 and 2). No significant differences in bond strength were found between the hydrofluoric and phosphoric acid etch technique.