A comparison between the shear bond strength of brackets bonded to glazed and deglazed porcelain surfaces with resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cement and a bis-GMA resin adhesive.World J Orthod. 2006 Summer; 7(2):134-7.WJ
This study compared the shear bond strength of a light-cure resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cement with a bis-GMA light-cure resin system in the bonding of stainless steel brackets to glazed and deglazed porcelain surfaces.
Porcelain surfaces were divided into 4 groups: group 1, deglazed porcelain surfaces with Transbond XT, group 2, glazed porcelain surfaces with Transbond XT; group 3, deglazed porcelain surfaces with Fuji Ortho LC; and group 4, porcelain surfaces with Fuji Ortho LC. Microetching with 50-microm aluminum oxide for 2 seconds at a distance of 5 mm deglazed the porcelain surfaces in groups 1 and 3. All brackets were bonded to the porcelain surfaces using the same procedure and light-cured for 40 seconds with a visible light. All samples were thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 300 cycles before testing for shear bond strength with a universal testing machine.
The analysis of variance showed no significant difference (P < .05) among the 4 groups; ie, group 1, 10.12 MPa; group 2, 7.00 MPa; group 3, 6.78 MPa; and group 4, 11.15 MPa. The F test also failed to demonstrate any statistical difference among the groups.
Conditioning the porcelain surfaces with 37% phosphoric acid immediately followed by a nonhydrolyzed silane coupling agent resulted in clinically adequate bond strength when using either a composite resin or a resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cement. Microetching of these porcelain surfaces apparently offers no bonding advantage.