INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of sandblasting to remove composite remnants after orthodontic bracket debonding. METHODS: The sample consisted of 20 human premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes. The buccal surface of each premolar was divided into 3 parts: the upper half (control surface group, CS), the lower half left (LS group), and the lower half right (SS group). A composite resin paste (volume, 5 x 3 x 1 mm3) was bonded onto the LS and SS surfaces. Then it was removed by using 1 of 2 methods: low-speed handpiece with tungsten carbide bur in the LS group and sandblasting in the SS group. Temperature change and removal time were recorded, and surface profiles were examined with 3-dimensional profilometry. RESULTS: An independent t test showed a statistically significant difference in temperature change between the LS and SS groups (P <.01). ANOVA showed no significant difference in surface profile between the LS and SS groups (P >.5). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that intraoral sandblasting might be an alternative to rotatory instruments for resin remnant removal after orthodontic bracket debonding.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of sandblasting to remove composite remnants after orthodontic bracket debonding. METHODS: The sample consisted of 20 human premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes. The buccal surface of each premolar was divided into 3 parts: the upper half (control surface group, CS), the lower half left (LS group), and the lower half right (SS group). A composite resin paste (volume, 5 x 3 x 1 mm3) was bonded onto the LS and SS surfaces. Then it was removed by using 1 of 2 methods: low-speed handpiece with tungsten carbide bur in the LS group and sandblasting in the SS group. Temperature change and removal time were recorded, and surface profiles were examined with 3-dimensional profilometry. RESULTS: An independent t test showed a statistically significant difference in temperature change between the LS and SS groups (P <.01). ANOVA showed no significant difference in surface profile between the LS and SS groups (P >.5). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that intraoral sandblasting might be an alternative to rotatory instruments for resin remnant removal after orthodontic bracket debonding.
Authors: Fabiano G Ferreira; Darcy F Nouer; Nelson P Silva; Ivana U Garbui; Lourenço Correr-Sobrinho; Paulo R A Nouer Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: José Tarcísio Lima Ferreira; Maria Cristina Borsatto; Maria Conceição Pereira Saraiva; Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto; Carolina Paes Torres; Fabio Lourenço Romano Journal: Turk J Orthod Date: 2020-03-01