Biomechanical evaluation between orthodontic attachment and three different materials after various surface treatments: <i>A three</i>-<i>dimensional optical profilometry analysis</i>

dc.authorid ARMAN OZCIRPICI, AYCA/0000-0002-9250-3689
dc.authorid Sar, Cagla/0000-0003-4966-9779
dc.authorscopusid 57210787473
dc.authorscopusid 7003879862
dc.authorscopusid 7003326611
dc.authorscopusid 35084310900
dc.contributor.author Kurt, Irem
dc.contributor.author Cehreli, Zafer Cavit
dc.contributor.author Ozcirpici, Ayca Arman
dc.contributor.author Sar, Cagla
dc.date.accessioned 2024-05-25T11:41:25Z
dc.date.available 2024-05-25T11:41:25Z
dc.date.issued 2019
dc.department Okan University en_US
dc.department-temp [Cehreli, Zafer Cavit] Hacettepe Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Pediat Dent, Ankara, Turkey; [Ozcirpici, Ayca Arman] Baskent Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Orthodont, Ankara, Turkey; [Sar, Cagla] Istanbul Okan Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Orthodont, Istanbul, Turkey en_US
dc.description ARMAN OZCIRPICI, AYCA/0000-0002-9250-3689; Sar, Cagla/0000-0003-4966-9779 en_US
dc.description.abstract Objectives: To determine the best bonding method of orthodontic attachment among monolithic zirconia, feldspathic porcelain, hybrid porcelain, and the impact of surface-conditioning methods using a three-dimensional optical profilometer after debonding. Materials and Methods: 56 feldspathic porcelain, 56 monolithic zirconia, and 56 hybrid porcelain samples were divided into four surface treatment subgroups: (1) hydrofluoric (HF) acid etch + silane, (2) Al2O3 sandblasting + silane, (3) silicoating (SiO2), and (4) diamond bur + silane. The specimens were tested to evaluate shear bond strength (SBS). Residual composite was removed after debonding. Three-dimensional white-light interferometry was used to obtain quantitative measurements on surface roughness. Results: The highest SBS value was found for the HF acid-etched feldspathic porcelain group. The average surface roughness values were significantly higher in all material groups in which diamond bur was applied, while roughening with Cojet provided average surface roughness values closer to the original material surface. Conclusions: Variations in structures of the materials and roughening techniques affected the SBS and surface roughness findings. en_US
dc.identifier.citationcount 10
dc.identifier.doi 10.2319/072918-547.1
dc.identifier.endpage 750 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0003-3219
dc.identifier.issn 1945-7103
dc.identifier.issue 5 en_US
dc.identifier.pmid 30855180
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-85071469179
dc.identifier.scopusquality Q1
dc.identifier.startpage 742 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.2319/072918-547.1
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14517/1522
dc.identifier.volume 89 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000482085000009
dc.identifier.wosquality Q2
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher E H Angle Education Research Foundation, inc en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 10
dc.subject Three-dimensional optical profilometry en_US
dc.subject Surface roughness en_US
dc.subject Shear bond strength en_US
dc.title Biomechanical evaluation between orthodontic attachment and three different materials after various surface treatments: <i>A three</i>-<i>dimensional optical profilometry analysis</i> en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.wos.citedbyCount 9

Files