Literature DB >> 21228118

Enamel loss and adhesive remnants following bracket removal and various clean-up procedures in vitro.

Sacha Ryf1, Simon Flury, Senthamaraiselvi Palaniappan, Adrian Lussi, Bart van Meerbeek, Brigitte Zimmerli.   

Abstract

This study evaluated the enamel loss and composite remnants after debonding and clean-up. The tested null hypothesis is that there are no differences between different polishing systems regarding removing composite remnants without damaging the tooth surface. Brackets were bonded to 75 extracted human molars and removed after a storage period of 100 hours. The adhesive remnant index (ARI) was evaluated. The clean-up was carried out with five different procedures: 1. carbide bur; 2. carbide bur and Brownie and Greenie silicone polishers; 3. carbide bur and Astropol polishers; 4. carbide bur and Renew polishers; and 5. carbide bur, Brownie, Greenie and PoGo polishers. Silicone impressions were made at baseline (T0) and after debonding (T1) and polishing (T2) to produce plaster replicas. The replicas were analysed with a three-dimensional laser scanner and measured with analytical software. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and pairwise Wilcoxon tests with Bonferroni-Holm adjustment (α = 0.05). Enamel breakouts after debonding were detectable in 27 per cent of all cases, with a mean volume loss of 0.02 mm(3) (±0.03 mm(3)) and depth of 44.9 μm (±48.3 μm). The overall ARI scores was 3 with a few scores of 1 and 2. The composite remnants after debonding had a mean volume of 2.48 mm(3) (±0.92 mm(3)). Mean volume loss due to polishing was 0.05 mm(3) (±0.26 mm(3)) and the composite remnants had a mean volume of 0.22 mm(3) (±0.32 mm(3)). There were no statistically significant differences in volumetric changes after polishing (P = 0.054) between the different clean-up methods. However, sufficient clean-up without enamel loss was difficult to achieve.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21228118     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjq128

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  35 in total

1.  Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of human dental enamel after bracket debonding: a noncontact three-dimensional optical profilometry analysis.

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

2.  An in vitro comparison of ultraviolet versus white light in the detection of adhesive remnants during orthodontic debonding.

Authors:  Connie Lai; Peter J Bush; Stephen Warunek; David A Covell; Thikriat Al-Jewair
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 2.079

3.  Orthodontic bracket debonding: risk of enamel fracture.

Authors:  Christof Holberg; Philipp Winterhalder; Nikola Holberg; Andrea Wichelhaus; Ingrid Rudzki-Janson
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-03-16       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Comparison of the Debonding Characteristics of Conventional and New Debonding Instrument used for Ceramic, Composite and Metallic Brackets - An Invitro Study.

Authors:  Garima Choudhary; Vikas Gill; Y N N Reddy; Sudhanshu Sanadhya; Pankaj Aapaliya; Nidhi Sharma
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-07-20

5.  Effect of adhesive remnant removal on enamel topography after bracket debonding.

Authors:  Larissa Adrian Meira Cardoso; Heloísa Cristina Valdrighi; Mario Vedovello Filho; Américo Bortolazzo Correr
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec

6.  Evaluation of a Fluorescence-aided Identification Technique (FIT) to assist clean-up after orthodontic bracket debonding.

Authors:  Oliver Stadler; Christian Dettwiler; Christian Meller; Michel Dalstra; Carlalberta Verna; Thomas Connert
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  Assessing abrasion of orthodontic surface sealants using a modified ophthalmic optical coherence tomography device.

Authors:  Sinan Şen; Ralf Erber; Kevin Kunzmann; Stefanie Kirschner; Vanessa Weyer; Lothar Schilling; Marc A Brockmann; Stefan Rues; Gül Orhan; Christopher J Lux; Sebastian Zingler
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.573

8.  Shear bond strength of brackets on restorative materials: Comparison on various dental restorative materials using the universal primer Monobond® Plus.

Authors:  Thomas Ebert; Laura Elsner; Ursula Hirschfelder; Sebastian Hanke
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 1.938

9.  On-line laser radiation controlled to the removal of adhesive on teeth after bracket debonding.

Authors:  Clara Gómez; Juan Carlos Palma; Ángel Costela
Journal:  Laser Ther       Date:  2017-03-31

10.  Analysis of enamel surface damage after selective laser ablation of composite from tooth surfaces.

Authors:  Kenneth H Chan; Krista Hirasuna; Daniel Fried
Journal:  Photonics Lasers Med       Date:  2014-02-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.