Zirkon yüzeyler ile seramik braketler arasındaki kopma dirençlerine farklı yüzey pürüzlendirme yöntemlerinin etkisi
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2023
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Ege Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Amaç: Seramik ortodontik braketler ve zirkon bloklar arasındaki makaslama bağ dayanımı (SBS) üzerine dört farklı yüzey pürüzlendirme işleminin etkinliğini değerlendirmek. 3 Gereç ve Yöntemler: Seksen adet 3Y-TZP monolitik zirkon blok (10 x 10 x 4 mm, Katana HT, Kuraray, Noritake, Japan) bilgisayar destekli tasarım/bilgisayar destekli üretim ile tasarlandı, sinterlendi ve akrilik rezine gömüldü. Bloklara; 400, 600, 800, 1000 grid silikon karbid kağıt ile polishing işlemi yapıldı. Örnekler, uygulanan yüzey pürüzlendirme yöntemine göre 5 gruba (n=16) ayrıldı; Grup Al2O3: 50?m Al2O3 partikülleri (50?m Al2O3, Hager&Werken, Germany) ile kumlama, Grup CoJet: 30?m silika kaplı Al2O3 partikülleri (CoJet Sand, 3M ESPE, Germany) ile kumlama, Grup Sof-lex: kalın grenli Sof-Lex diskler (Sof?Lex 2382C,3M ESPE) ile pürüzlendirme, Grup Er:YAG: ErYAG lazer (Light Walker ,Fotona Ljubljana, Slovenia ) ile yüzey pürüzlendirme , Grup Kontrol: herhangi bir yüzey işlemi uygulanmayan grup. Tüm numune yüzeylerine, zirkon primeri (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray, Japan) ve ortodontik primer (Transbond XT Adeziv Primer, 3M Unitek, USA) uygulandı. Maksillar sağ santral polikristalin seramik braketler (Gemini Clear Seramik Braketler, 3M Unitek) Transbond XT adeziv kompozit (3M, Unitek) ile yapıştırıldı. Tüm örneklere 1000 kez termal siklus işlemi uygulandı. Yapıştırılan örneklere, SBS testi (0,5 mm/dk) uygulandı. Tüm yüzeylerden stereomikroskop (x20) görüntüleri alınarak Artık Yapıştırıcı Indeks (ARI) skorlaması yapıldı. Veriler istatistiksel olarak Kruskal Wallis testi ve Bonferroni düzeltmeli Dunn testi kullanılarak analiz edildi (p = 0.05). ARI skoru Pearson ki-kare testi ile hesaplandı (p = 0.05). Yüzey pürüzlendirme işlemlerinden ve SBS testinden sonra SEM görüntülemeleri alındı. Bulgular: Ortalama SBS değerleri (MPa) gruplar arasında anlamlı bir fark gösterdi (p < 0.05). SBS değerleri, Er:YAG grubunda, Sof-lex grubu ve Kontrol gruplarına göre anlamlı olarak yüksek bulunurken (p<0,05), Al2O3 ve CoJet grubuna benzerdi (p>0,05). CoJet grubu da, kontrol grubuna göre anlamlı olarak yüksekti (p<0.05). Kontrol grubu hariç tüm gruplarda ARI skoru 3 yüksek ve benzer bulundu. SEM görüntülemelerinde, SBS testi sonrası zirkon yüzeylerde herhangi bir kırık ve çatlağa rastlanmadı. Sonuç: Tüm yüzey pürüzlendirme grupları ortodontik tedaviler için yeterli adezyon gösterdi. Er:YAG lazer, Al2O3 ve CoJet grupları benzer, Sof-lex grubundan yüksek bağ dayanımı gösterdi. Sof-Lex grubunun ise, Al2O3 ve CoJet grubuna benzer bağ dayanımına sahip olduğu bulunarak, ekstra ekipman kullanımı gerektirmeden zirkon yüzeyleri pürüzlendirmede kullanılabileceği gösterildi. SBS testi sonucunda, pürüzlendirme yapılan gruplarda zirkon yüzeyler için güvenilir ayrılma elde edildi. 3Y-TZP monolitik zirkon yüzeylere bağlanmada; 10-MDP ve 3-MPS silan içerikli primer kullanımı tavsiye edildi.
Aim: To evaluate the effect of four different surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between ceramic orthodontic brackets and zirconia blocks. 3 Material and Methods: Eighty 3Y-TZP monolitic zirconia blocks (10 x 10 x 4 mm, Katana HT, Kuraray, Noritake, Japan) were computer?aided design/computer?aided manufacturing milled, sintered and embedded in acrylic resin. The blocks were polished with 400, 600, 800, 1000 grid silicone carbid paper. The specimens were divided into five groups(n=16) according to the surface treatment applied: Group Al2O3: sandblasted with 50-?m Al2O3 particles (50?m Al2O3, Hager&Werken, Germany), Group CoJet: tribochemical coating with 30-?m silica coated Al2O3 particles (CoJet Sand, 3M ESPE, Germany), Group Sof-lex: Course Sof?Lex disc roughening (Sof?Lex 2382C,3M ESPE), Group Er:Y AG: Er-Y AG laser roughening(Light Walker ,Fotona Ljubljana, Slovenia ) and Group Control : non- conditioned. A ceramic primer (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray) and an orthodontic primer (Transbond-XT Adhesive Primer,3M, Unitek, USA) were applied to all specimen surfaces. Maxillary right central polycrystalline ceramic brackets (Gemini Clear ceramic brackets, 3M Unitek) were bonded with Transbond XT adhesive paste (3M, Unitek). All specimens underwent 1000 thermocycling. The bonded specimens were subjected to SBS testing (0.5 mm/min). An adhesive remnant index (ARI) was performed by taking stereomicroscope(x20) images from all surfaces. Data were analyzed statistically using Kruskal Wallis test and the Bonferroni correction with Dunn test (p = 0.05). An adhesive remnant index (ARI) score was calculated Pearson's chi-square test (p = 0.05). SEM images taken after surface roughening treatments and SBS test. Results: Mean SBS values (MPa) showed a significant difference between groups (p < 0.05). While SBS values were significantly higher in Er:YAG group than Soflex group and Control groups (p<0.05), they were similar to Al2O3 and CoJet groups(p>0.05). CoJet group was also significantly higher than the control group (p<0.05). ARI score of 3 was dominant and similar in all groups except the control group. In SEM imaging, no fractures or cracks were found on the zirconia surfaces after SBS test. Conclusion: All surface roughening groups showed sufficient adhesion for orthodontic treatments. Er:YAG laser, Al2O3 and CoJet groups showed similar, higher bond strength than Soflex group. The Sof-Lex group was found to have similar bond strength to the Al2O3 and CoJet group, and it was shown that it could be used to roughen zirconia surfaces without the need for extra equipment. After the SBS test, reliable separation was obtained for the zirconia surfaces in the roughening groups. The use of primers containing 10-MDP and 3-MPS silane was recommended for bonding to 3Y-TZP monolithic zirconia surfaces.
Aim: To evaluate the effect of four different surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between ceramic orthodontic brackets and zirconia blocks. 3 Material and Methods: Eighty 3Y-TZP monolitic zirconia blocks (10 x 10 x 4 mm, Katana HT, Kuraray, Noritake, Japan) were computer?aided design/computer?aided manufacturing milled, sintered and embedded in acrylic resin. The blocks were polished with 400, 600, 800, 1000 grid silicone carbid paper. The specimens were divided into five groups(n=16) according to the surface treatment applied: Group Al2O3: sandblasted with 50-?m Al2O3 particles (50?m Al2O3, Hager&Werken, Germany), Group CoJet: tribochemical coating with 30-?m silica coated Al2O3 particles (CoJet Sand, 3M ESPE, Germany), Group Sof-lex: Course Sof?Lex disc roughening (Sof?Lex 2382C,3M ESPE), Group Er:Y AG: Er-Y AG laser roughening(Light Walker ,Fotona Ljubljana, Slovenia ) and Group Control : non- conditioned. A ceramic primer (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray) and an orthodontic primer (Transbond-XT Adhesive Primer,3M, Unitek, USA) were applied to all specimen surfaces. Maxillary right central polycrystalline ceramic brackets (Gemini Clear ceramic brackets, 3M Unitek) were bonded with Transbond XT adhesive paste (3M, Unitek). All specimens underwent 1000 thermocycling. The bonded specimens were subjected to SBS testing (0.5 mm/min). An adhesive remnant index (ARI) was performed by taking stereomicroscope(x20) images from all surfaces. Data were analyzed statistically using Kruskal Wallis test and the Bonferroni correction with Dunn test (p = 0.05). An adhesive remnant index (ARI) score was calculated Pearson's chi-square test (p = 0.05). SEM images taken after surface roughening treatments and SBS test. Results: Mean SBS values (MPa) showed a significant difference between groups (p < 0.05). While SBS values were significantly higher in Er:YAG group than Soflex group and Control groups (p<0.05), they were similar to Al2O3 and CoJet groups(p>0.05). CoJet group was also significantly higher than the control group (p<0.05). ARI score of 3 was dominant and similar in all groups except the control group. In SEM imaging, no fractures or cracks were found on the zirconia surfaces after SBS test. Conclusion: All surface roughening groups showed sufficient adhesion for orthodontic treatments. Er:YAG laser, Al2O3 and CoJet groups showed similar, higher bond strength than Soflex group. The Sof-Lex group was found to have similar bond strength to the Al2O3 and CoJet group, and it was shown that it could be used to roughen zirconia surfaces without the need for extra equipment. After the SBS test, reliable separation was obtained for the zirconia surfaces in the roughening groups. The use of primers containing 10-MDP and 3-MPS silane was recommended for bonding to 3Y-TZP monolithic zirconia surfaces.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Diş Hekimliği, Dentistry, Zirkon yüzeyler, seramik braketler, Er:YAG lazerler, Zirconia surfaces, ceramic brackets, Er:YAG lasers
