Content area
Full Text
Received Mar 20, 2018; Accepted May 2, 2018
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Introduction
An important part of facial esthetics is dental esthetics, including adult orthodontics [1, 2]. The advanced age of an adult orthodontic patient may necessitate some partial and full coverage dental restorations such as jacket crowns or laminates alongside orthodontic treatment. Adult orthodontics may confront problems related to the bonding performance of orthodontic brackets to different restorative materials used for crown or laminate restorations such as ceramics or new generation CAD/CAM materials [3–6].
Dental ceramics remain the best dental material in terms of their biocompatibility and esthetic properties in contemporary fixed prosthodontics. However, dental ceramics have some disadvantages related to their physical properties such as brittleness, antagonistic tooth wear, and also bracket bonding problems. These disadvantages have led dental material scientists to develop materials that mimic the natural tooth structure and eliminate the disadvantages of conventional dental materials. Besides zirconia and conventional dental ceramics, various new generation dental materials such as interpenetrating network composite (IPN) and nanoceramic composite (NCC) are now also available to dental clinicians.
In the dental literature, different surface treatment methods were suggested to strengthen the bonding between brackets and dental restorative materials especially dental ceramics. Saraç et al. [4] evaluated the effectiveness of air-particle abrasion and tribochemical silica coating on the bond strength of feldspathic, leucite reinforced, and fluorapatite dental ceramics to brackets. They concluded that chair side tribochemical silica coating increased bond strength values in all groups. Besides this, leucite reinforced dental ceramic displayed better bond strength values than the other two types of dental ceramics used in the study [4]. In a study [5], bond strengths of a feldspathic dental ceramic to brackets were evaluated using hydrofluoric acid, silane, alumina sandblasting, and silica-coating applications. According to the results of the study [5], all the methods fulfilled the threshold of ideal bond strength for clinical use except the hydrofluoric acid alone. In the same study, the tribochemical silica-coating technique showed the highest bond strength; however, failure modes resulted in fractures of ceramic surfaces.
Since both IPN and NCC are relatively new...