BRAKET YAYIN SONUÇLARI DATA.docxmanuscript bracketEffect of different surface conditioning methods and low pH solutions on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to newly introduced CAD/CAM materials

<br><b>Effect of different surface conditioning methods and low pH solutions on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets to newly introduced CAD/CAM materials </b><b>Aim:</b> To evaluate shear bond strength of ceramic and metallic orthodontic brackets bonded to lithium-disilicate ceramics or hibrid ceramics conditioned with various surface treatments.<b>Material and Method: </b>A total of 300 specimens<b> </b>(n=10)<b> </b>were fabricated from GC LiSi and GC Cerasmart ceramic blocks and divided into two groups. The specimens were divided into four groups according to the surface treatment applied: hydrofluoric acid (HF); sandblasting with 50 μm Al₂O₃,;Monobond Etch and Prime (MEP) and Er-YAG laser. Metal (Victory Series) and ceramic (Clarity) brackets were bonded with orthodontic adhesive resin (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, CA). Then, Specimens were stored in three different mediums (artificial saliva, mouth rinse and stomach acid) and thermocycled. The SBS test was performed after 1 week. Surface morphology was examined after treatments using a SEM. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, T-test and Duncan test.<b>Results</b>: The SBS data revealed that CAD/CAM block and surface conditioning method significantly affected bond strength. The highest SBS value was recorded in HF-treated hybrid ceramic group in saliva while lowest SBS was found in laser- treated lithium disilicate ceramic blocks exposed to gastric juice. GC Cerasmart showed better bond strength than GC LiSi. However, no significant difference between ceramic and metal brackets.<b>Conclusion: </b>CAD/CAM material types and surface conditioning methods affected the bond strength. Medium also significantly affected bond strength.<br><br><br><br>