• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

The Influence of Various Adhesive Systems and Polishing Methods on Enamel Surface Roughness after Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: A Three-Dimensional In Vitro Evaluation

T. Křivková, A. Tichý, H. Tycová, J. Kučera

. 2023 ; 16 (14) : . [pub] 20230720

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc23015682

Grantová podpora
Progres Q29/1LF Charles University
Cooperatio 207030 Dental Medicine/LF1 Charles University

A slight alteration of the enamel surface is inevitable upon debonding of orthodontic brackets, adhesive removal, and finishing/polishing. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare two adhesives and three polishing methods by measuring enamel surface roughness using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Brackets were bonded on 42 extracted human premolars using Transbond XT (Transbond group) or Fuji Ortho (Fuji group). After debracketing, adhesives were removed with a tungsten carbide bur, and surfaces were polished using Sof-Lex discs, a rotary brush with a prophylactic paste (Depural), or a prophylactic cup with two polishing pastes (n = 7 in each subgroup). Surface roughness (Sa, Sku, Sq, and Sz) was measured using CLSM and compared before treatment (T1), after debracketing and adhesive removal (T2), and after polishing (T3). The data were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni correction. The time required for adhesive removal was measured and compared using a two-sample t-test. Surface roughness at T2 increased compared to T1, but the difference was significant only for the Fuji group (p < 0.01). The time required to remove Transbond XT (94.1 ± 6.8 s) was significantly higher compared to Fuji (72.1 ± 5.9 s, p < 0.0001). Polishing with Sof-Lex discs resulted in lower surface roughness compared to T1 (p = 0.018). Using Depural and polishing pastes showed no significant difference in surface roughness compared to T1, except for a significant decrease in Sa and Sq for Transbond (p = 0.043) and in Sku for Fuji (p = 0.018) after polishing with Depural. In conclusion, the removal of Transbond took significantly longer, but there were fewer residues of composite resin on the enamel surface. Sof-Lex discs decreased enamel roughness, whereas enamel morphology and roughness were similar to the pre-treatment state after polishing with polishing pastes.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc23015682
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20231020093536.0
007      
ta
008      
231010s2023 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/ma16145107 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)37512378
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Křivková, Tereza $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Kateřinská 32, 121 11 Prague, Czech Republic
245    14
$a The Influence of Various Adhesive Systems and Polishing Methods on Enamel Surface Roughness after Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: A Three-Dimensional In Vitro Evaluation / $c T. Křivková, A. Tichý, H. Tycová, J. Kučera
520    9_
$a A slight alteration of the enamel surface is inevitable upon debonding of orthodontic brackets, adhesive removal, and finishing/polishing. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare two adhesives and three polishing methods by measuring enamel surface roughness using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Brackets were bonded on 42 extracted human premolars using Transbond XT (Transbond group) or Fuji Ortho (Fuji group). After debracketing, adhesives were removed with a tungsten carbide bur, and surfaces were polished using Sof-Lex discs, a rotary brush with a prophylactic paste (Depural), or a prophylactic cup with two polishing pastes (n = 7 in each subgroup). Surface roughness (Sa, Sku, Sq, and Sz) was measured using CLSM and compared before treatment (T1), after debracketing and adhesive removal (T2), and after polishing (T3). The data were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni correction. The time required for adhesive removal was measured and compared using a two-sample t-test. Surface roughness at T2 increased compared to T1, but the difference was significant only for the Fuji group (p < 0.01). The time required to remove Transbond XT (94.1 ± 6.8 s) was significantly higher compared to Fuji (72.1 ± 5.9 s, p < 0.0001). Polishing with Sof-Lex discs resulted in lower surface roughness compared to T1 (p = 0.018). Using Depural and polishing pastes showed no significant difference in surface roughness compared to T1, except for a significant decrease in Sa and Sq for Transbond (p = 0.043) and in Sku for Fuji (p = 0.018) after polishing with Depural. In conclusion, the removal of Transbond took significantly longer, but there were fewer residues of composite resin on the enamel surface. Sof-Lex discs decreased enamel roughness, whereas enamel morphology and roughness were similar to the pre-treatment state after polishing with polishing pastes.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Tichý, Antonín $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Kateřinská 32, 121 11 Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000262609992
700    1_
$a Tycová, Hana $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Kateřinská 32, 121 11 Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Kučera, Josef $u Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Kateřinská 32, 121 11 Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacký University Olomouc, Palackého 700/12, 779 00 Olomouc, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000344472467
773    0_
$w MED00194074 $t Materials $x 1996-1944 $g Roč. 16, č. 14 (2023)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37512378 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20231010 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20231020093530 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1997225 $s 1202044
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2023 $b 16 $c 14 $e 20230720 $i 1996-1944 $m Materials $n Materials (Basel) $x MED00194074
GRA    __
$a Progres Q29/1LF $p Charles University
GRA    __
$a Cooperatio 207030 Dental Medicine/LF1 $p Charles University
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20231010

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...