Comparison of the shear rebond strength of zirconia brackets treated with different Er:YAG laser energies
Source abstract
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the optimal technological parameters for rebonding zirconia brackets treated using an erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser. Er:YAG lasers with varying energies were compared with the flaming and sandblasting treatment methods. Detached zirconia brackets were treated and evaluated for shear rebond strength, bracket bottom-plate morphology, position, and depth of microleakage. They were then treated for rebonding using flaming, sandblasting, or an Er:YAG laser set at 250-mJ, 300-mJ, 350-mJ energy. Their shear rebond strength were measured using microforce tester. The topography of the treated bottom plates were observed using scanning electron microscopy. A confocal laser scanning microscope was used to measure the depth of the joint and gingival-side microleakage at the bracket-adhesive (B-A) and enamel-adhesive interfaces. With 300 mJ Er:YAG laser treatment, the detached zirconia brackets can obtain good rebonding strength and minimize the shape change of bracket bottom plates; the adhesion of the B-A interface is better than other methods.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Erosion and Treatment · Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Orthodontics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University
Department of Orthodontics, Xinhua Hospital of Tongzhou District
Department of Endodontics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University
Department of Prosthodontics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Guzman UA, Jerrold L, Vig PS, Abdelkarim A. Comparison of shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index between precoated and conventionally bonded orthodontic brackets. Prog Orthod 2013; 14: 39.10.1186/2196-1042-14-39 ↗
2. 2) Sapru B, Sengupta J. Orthodontics: Current principles and techniques. Med J Armed Forces India 2001; 57: 267.10.1016/S0377-1237(01)80071-X ↗
3. 3) Bishara SE, Laffoon JF, Vonwald L, Warren JJ. The effect of repeated bonding on the shear bond strength of different orthodontic adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 121: 521-525.10.1067/mod.2002.123042 ↗
4. 4) Egan FR, Alexander SA, Cartwright GE. Bond strength of rebonded orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996; 109: 64-70.10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70164-6 ↗
5. 5) Chen M, Ding J, Jiang Q, He Y. Er: YAG laser in the application of oral medicine. Int J Stomatol 2012; 39: 797-800.
6. 6) Grzech-Leśniak K, Matys J, Żmuda-Stawowiak D, Mroczka K, Dominiak M, Brugnera Jr A, et al. Er:YAG laser for metal and ceramic bracket debonding: An in vitro study on intrapulpal temperature, SEM, and EDS analysis. Photomed Laser Surg 2018; 36: 595-600.10.1089/pho.2017.4412 ↗
7. 7) Dostalova T, Jelinkova H, Remes M, Šulc J, Němec M. The use of the Er:YAG laser for bracket debonding and its effect on enamel damage. Photomed Laser Surg 2016; 34: 394-399.10.1089/pho.2016.4115 ↗
8. 8) Seifi M, Vahid-Dastjerdi E. Tooth movement alterations by different low level laser protocols: A literature review. J Lasers Med Sci 2015; 6: 1-5.
9. 9) Ahrari F, Fekrazad R, Kalhori KA, Ramtin M. Reconditioning of ceramic orthodontic brackets with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Lasers Med Sci 2013; 28: 223-228.10.1007/s10103-012-1093-4 ↗
10. 10) Yassaei S, Aghili H, KhanPayeh E, Goldani Moghadam M. Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded brackets with four methods of adhesive removal. Lasers Med Sci 2014; 29: 1563-1568.10.1007/s10103-013-1310-9 ↗
11. 11) de Souza-e-Silva CM, Parisotto TM, Steiner-Oliveira C, Kamiya RU, Rodrigues LK, Nobre-dos-Santos M. Carbon dioxide laser and bonding materials reduce enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets. Lasers Med Sci 2013; 28: 111-118.10.1007/s10103-012-1076-5 ↗
12. 12) Miresmaeili A, Etrati Khosroshahi M, Motahary P, Rezaei-Soufi L, Mahjub H, Dadashi M, et al. Effect of argon laser on enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets: An in vitro study. J Dent (Tehran) 2014; 11: 411-417.
13. 13) de Jesus Tavarez RR, Lima Bezerra G, de Souza Penha KJ, Torres CR, Firoozmand LM. Er:YAG pre-treatment for bonding of orthodontic bracket: 1 year of in vitro treatment. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2017; 9: 19-25.10.2147/CCIDE.S129628 ↗
14. 14) Delmé K, Meire M, De Bruyne M, Nammour S, De Moor R. [Cavity preparation using an Er:YAG laser in the adult dentition]. Rev Belge Med Dent (1984) 2009; 64: 71-80.
15. 15) Xu Z, Li J, Fan X, Huang X. Bonding strength of orthodontic brackets on porcelain surfaces etched by Er:YAG laser. Photomed Laser Surg 2018; 36: 601-607.10.1089/pho.2017.4429 ↗
16. 16) Poosti M, Ramazanzadeh B, Zebarjad M, Javadzadeh P, Naderinasab M, Shakeri MT. Shear bond strength and antibacterial effects of orthodontic composite containing TiO2 nanoparticles. Eur J Orthod 2013; 35: 676-679.10.1093/ejo/cjs073 ↗
17. 17) Mahajan V. Effect of light-cured filled sealant on the shear bond strength of metal, ceramic and titanium brackets bonded with resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Ind J Dent Res 2013; 24: 745-749.10.4103/0970-9290.127625 ↗
18. 18) You X, Chen L, Xu J, Li S, Zhang Z, Guo L. Effects of carbodiimide combined with ethanol-wet bonding pretreatment on dentin bonding properties: An in vitro study. PeerJ 2022; 10: e14238.10.7717/peerj.14238 ↗
19. 19) Artun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid-etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 333-340.10.1016/0002-9416(84)90190-8 ↗
20. 20) Tudehzaeim MH, Yassaei S, Taherimoghadam S. Comparison of microleakage under rebonded stainless steel orthodontic brackets using two methods of adhesive removal: Sandblast and laser. J Dent (Tehran) 2015; 12: 118-124.
21. 21) Davari AR, Yassaei S, Kazemi ARD, Tajabadi Z. In vitro evaluation of microleakage of orthodontic brackets bonded using methacrylate and silorane base composite. Majallah-i Dānishgāh-i’ Ulūm-i Pizishkī-i Shahīd Ṣadūqī Yazd 2015; 23: 558-569.
22. 22) Sharma-Sayal SK, Rossouw PE, Kulkarni GV, Titley KC. The influence of orthodontic bracket base design on shear bond strength. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 74-82.10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00311-1 ↗
23. 23) Rosenstein P, Binder RE. Bonding and rebonding peel testing of orthodontic brackets. Clin Prev Dent 1980; 2: 15-17.
24. 24) Chung CH, Friedman SD, Mante FK. Shear bond strength of rebonded mechanically retentive ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 122: 282-287.10.1067/mod.2002.125994 ↗
25. 25) Wen Y, Ma W, Dong F. Influence of different treatment methods on the rebonding strength of ceramic bracer. J Modern Stomatol 2012; 26: 90-95.
26. 26) Ishida K, Endo T, Shinkai K, Katoh Y. Shear bond strength of rebonded brackets after removal of adhesives with Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Odontology 2011; 99: 129-134.10.1007/s10266-011-0012-7 ↗
27. 27) Chen L. Research on laser cleaning technology of orthodontic bracket Beijing: University of Technology; 2014.
28. 28) Han RQ, Yang K, Ji LF, Ling C. Analysis of shear bond strength and morphology of Er:YAG laser-recycled ceramic orthodontic brackets. Biomed Res Int 2016; 2016: 7276287.10.1155/2016/7276287 ↗
29. 29) Cao Y, Fu L, Sun X, Lin X. Influence of different treatment methods on the searing strength of the re-bonding of the exfoliating bracket. J Stomatol 2018; 38: 230-233.
30. 30) Atsü S, Çatalbaş B, Gelgör İ E. Effects of silica coating and silane surface conditioning on the bond strength of rebonded metal and ceramic brackets. J Appl Oral Sci 2011; 19: 233-239.10.1590/S1678-77572011000300010 ↗
31. 31) Montero MM, Vicente A, Alfonso-Hernández N, Jiménez-López M, Bravo-González LA. Comparison of shear bond strength of brackets recycled using micro sandblasting and industrial methods. Angle Orthod 2015; 85: 461-467.10.2319/032414-221.1 ↗
32. 32) Zhang X, Zhang X, Yan M, Hui J. The shear strength of the adhesive between the peeling brackets and the tooth surface after sandblasting treatment. Shanghai Med J 2019; 32: 329-331.
33. 33) Willems G, Carels CE, Verbeke G. In vitro peel/shear bond strength evaluation of orthodontic bracket base design. J Dent 1997; 25: 271-278.10.1016/S0300-5712(96)00007-3 ↗
34. 34) Regan D, LeMasney B, van Noort R. The tensile bond strength of new and rebonded stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Eur J Orthod 1993; 15: 125-135.10.1093/ejo/15.2.125 ↗
35. 35) Lew KK, Chew CL, Lee KW. A comparison of shear bond strengths between new and recycled ceramic brackets. Eur J Orthod 1991; 13: 306-310.10.1093/ejo/13.4.306 ↗
36. 36) Hou Y, Gao J. Research progress of the effect of YAG laser irradiation on the adhesion of dental ceramic materials. Int J Stomatol 2019; 46: 68-72.
37. 37) Bahnasi FI, Abd-Rahman AN, Abu-Hassan MI. Effects of recycling and bonding agent application on bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets. J Clin Exp Dent 2013; 5: 197-202.10.4317/jced.51113 ↗
38. 38) Akin H, Tugut F, Akin GE, Guney U, Mutaf B. Effect of Er:YAG laser application on the shear bond strength and microleakage between resin cements and Y-TZP ceramics. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27: 333-338.10.1007/s10103-011-0883-4 ↗
39. 39) Yan K. Experimental study on the effect of Er:YAG laser pretreatment on the bouding properties of glass ceramics to dentin. Shijiazhuang: Hebei Medical University; 2016.