# Bond strength of thermoformed and 3D-printed aligners with universal primer versus one-step aligner adhesive with and without sandblasting: An in vitro study

**Authors:** Viet Anh Nguyen, Viet Hoang, Thi Quynh Trang Vuong, Thi Nga Phung, Nghi Phan Bich Hoang, Rawaa A. Faris, Rawaa A. Faris, Rawaa A. Faris

PMC · DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0341664 · PLOS One · 2026-01-23

## TL;DR

This study compares how well different bonding methods work on various aligner materials, finding that material type and sandblasting significantly affect bond strength.

## Contribution

The study introduces a comparative analysis of bonding protocols for thermoformed and 3D-printed aligner materials, revealing substrate-specific optimal practices.

## Key findings

- Bond strength varied significantly based on material and sandblasting treatment.
- PETG with a one-step adhesive achieved the highest bond strength without sandblasting.
- Sandblasting improved bond strength for some materials but was not universally beneficial.

## Abstract

Chairside bonding of auxiliaries directly to aligners can avoid remanufacturing trays, but optimal protocols may be substrate-specific across modern thermoformed and 3D-printed materials. This study aimed to compare bond strength and failure mode across six representative aligner materials using a universal primer-orthodontic adhesive combination and a one-step aligner adhesive, with and without sandblasting.

Polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified (PETG), thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), and glycol-modified polycyclohexylenedimethylene terephthalate (PCTG), together with three 3D-printed resins (TA-28, TC-85DAC, DCA), were prepared as 0.76-mm plates (n = 64). Specimens received alumina sandblasting or no treatment, then were bonded with either of two bonding strategies (n = 16). After thermocycling, bond strength was tested, and failures were scored by ARI. Two- and three-way ANOVA and proportional-odds modeling assessed effects (α = 0.05).

Bond strength showed significant main effects of material and sandblasting, with significant material–sandblasting and material–primer interactions. The primer main effect was not significant. Post hoc tests confirmed substrate-specific rankings. PETG with Bond Aligner (non-sandblasted) reached 26.71 MPa, while DCA with universal primer (sandblasted) reached 22.36 MPa. Sandblasting generally increased bond strength, with some exceptions. Failure mode was material-dependent and not completely parallel with bond strength.

Bonding efficacy depends on the aligner substrate. For thermoformed trays, a one-step aligner adhesive is preferable, with sandblasting contraindicated for PETG but advantageous for more elastic TPU and PCTG. For 3D-printed trays, a universal primer-orthodontic adhesive combination performs more consistently, with sandblasting benefiting DCA and TA-28, whereas TC-85DAC performs slightly better without it.

## Linked entities

- **Chemicals:** TA-28 (PubChem CID 5744992), DCA (PubChem CID 6597)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** AL-HAMD (MESH:D009101), ARI 3 (MESH:C567555), malocclusions (MESH:D008310)
- **Chemicals:** nitrogen (MESH:D009584), ethylene glycol (MESH:D019855), Ra (MESH:D011883), Al2O3 (MESH:D000537), thiol (MESH:D013438), isopropyl alcohol (MESH:D019840), 3-mercaptopropionate (-), methacrylate (MESH:D008689), cyanoacrylate (MESH:D003487), silicone (MESH:D012828), 10-MDP (MESH:C069749), glycol (MESH:D006018), polymer (MESH:D011108), TC (MESH:D013667), N,N-dimethylacrylamide (MESH:C099046), urethane dimethacrylate (MESH:C029824), DAC (MESH:D000077209), oxygen (MESH:D010100), Polyethylene terephthalate glycol (MESH:C475920), polyurethane (MESH:D011140), acrylate (MESH:C036658), triethylene glycol (MESH:C028914), 1,4-cyclohexanedimethanol (MESH:C023353), water (MESH:D014867)
- **Species:** Canis lupus familiaris (dog, subspecies) [taxon 9615], Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]
- **Cell lines:** RANEEN KH — Homo sapiens (Human), Childhood T acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Cancer cell line (CVCL_JF66)

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12829832/full.md

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12829832/full.md

## References

31 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12829832/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12829832