» Articles » PMID: 38107037

Testing the Tensile Fracture Strength Tie-wings of Different Orthodontic Ceramic Bracket Using an Instron Machine

Overview
Journal Saudi Dent J
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2023 Dec 18
PMID 38107037
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Newly released products should address the shortcomings of the older ones. Frequent breakages have always been a major drawback when using ceramic brackets. This study assessed the difference in tensile fracture strength at maximum load of tie-wings of different orthodontic ceramic brackets recently available for clinical use.

Materials And Methods: In this in-vitro study, four ceramic brackets were examined. Two monocrystalline brackets (CLEAR™, Adanta®, Germany; Inspire ICE™, Ormco®, USA), one polycrystalline bracket (Symtri Clear™, Ormco®, USA), and one clear hybrid bracket (DISCREET™, Adanta®, Germany). A steel ligature wire was placed around the tie-wing and on the Instron machine to apply tension. The mean maximum load (MxL) and fracture strength (FS) was evaluated and recorded. The significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05.

Results: Statistical difference in fracture strength of the tie-wing fracture was noted among all four groups. Inspire ICE™ showed the highest maximum load and fracture strength with (202.78 N and 107.3 MPa), followed by Symtri Clear™ (111.99 N and 59.25 MPa). In contrast, CLEAR™ and DISCREET™ showed lower MxL values (79.63 N and 47.01 N). The monocrystalline Inspire ICE™ brackets showed the greatest tie-wing fracture resistance and the hybrid clear ceramic bracket DISCREET™ exposed the least resistance to fracture.

Conclusion: Brand (manufacturing specifications) as well the bracket crystalline structure seems to have a direct effect on its tie-wing strength.

References
1.
Birnie D . Ceramic brackets. Br J Orthod. 1990; 17(1):71-4. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.17.1.71. View

2.
Karamouzos A, Athanasiou A, Papadopoulos M . Clinical characteristics and properties of ceramic brackets: A comprehensive review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 112(1):34-40. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(97)70271-3. View

3.
Bishara S, Fehr D . Ceramic brackets: something old, something new, a review. Semin Orthod. 1998; 3(3):178-88. DOI: 10.1016/s1073-8746(97)80068-0. View

4.
Flores D, Caruso J, SCOTT G, Jeiroudi M . The fracture strength of ceramic brackets: a comparative study. Angle Orthod. 1990; 60(4):269-76. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1990)060<0269:TFSOCB>2.0.CO;2. View

5.
Khanapure C, Ayesha S, Sam G, Anil Kumar V, Deepika C, Ahmed H . Evaluation of Different Bracket's Resistance to Torsional Forces from Archwire. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016; 17(7):564-7. View