Literature DB >> 2198800

Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part I. Background and methods.

S E Bishara1, T S Trulove.   

Abstract

Techniques for removing metal orthodontic attachments are, for the most part, not as effective with ceramic brackets because the properties of ceramic brackets differ greatly from those of the conventional metal orthodontic brackets. Currently available ceramic brackets are composed of aluminum oxide crystals in either a polycrystalline or monocrystalline form that has a low fracture toughness compared with that of stainless steel. Metal brackets will deform 20% under stress before fracturing, whereas ceramic brackets will deform less than 1% before failing. The purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate the debonding characteristics of three different types of ceramic brackets when removed by techniques recommended by the manufacturers; (2) to evaluate and compare the conventional, ultrasonic, and electrothermal bracket-removal techniques, and (3) to evaluate and compare the mean enamel loss from removal by high-speed bur, by slow-speed bur, and by the ultrasonic method. In the first phase of the investigation, 140 teeth (70 maxillary central incisors and 70 third molars) were bonded with one of three types of ceramic brackets. Three different debonding methods were tested--(1) the conventional method recommended by the manufacturer (either pliers or wrench), (2) an ultrasonic method that employed specially designed tips, and (3) an electrothermal method involving an apparatus that transmits heat to the bracket. In each of the test groups, five variables were evaluated during and after bracket removal: (1) the incidence of bracket failure, (2) the amount of adhesive remaining after bracket removal, (3) the site of bond failure, (4) the debonding time for each technique, and (5) enamel damage resulting from bracket removal.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2198800     DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(90)70008-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  23 in total

1.  Comparison of shear bond strengths of ceramic brackets after different time lags between lasing and debonding.

Authors:  Murat Tozlu; Mehmet Oguz Oztoprak; Tülin Arun
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Porous ceramic lamellae for orthodontic ceramic brackets: part I: fabrication and characterization.

Authors:  S Arici; C J Minors; P F Messer
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.896

3.  Ceramic bracket debonding with ytterbium fiber laser.

Authors:  Ayşe Sena Kabaş Sarp; Murat Gülsoy
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 3.161

4.  [Elemental analytical and quantitative morphometric determination of the synthetic resin residues and enamel avulsion after the removal of metal brackets].

Authors:  T Ruppenthal; U Stratmann; H G Sergl; D Czech
Journal:  Fortschr Kieferorthop       Date:  1992-04

5.  A Comparison of Shear Bond Strengths of Metal and Ceramic Brackets using Conventional Acid Etching Technique and Er:YAG Laser Etching.

Authors:  Sogra Yassaei; Reza Fekrazad; Neda Shahraki; Mahdjoube Goldani Moghadam
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2014-03-05

Review 6.  Indirect Bonding Revisited.

Authors:  Hande Pamukçu; Ömür Polat Özsoy
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2016-09-01

7.  Effect of Er:YAG Laser and Sandblasting in Recycling of Ceramic Brackets.

Authors:  Soghra Yassaei; Hossein Aghili; Azadeh Hosseinzadeh Firouzabadi; Hamidreza Meshkani
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2017-01-08

8.  Survey on awareness and preference of ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists.

Authors:  Aileen Y Ngan; Prashanti Bollu; Kishore Chaudhry; Richard Stevens; Karthikeyan Subramani
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-07-01

9.  Rapid debonding of polycrystalline ceramic orthodontic brackets with an Er:YAG laser: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Ambili Roselina Mundethu; Norbert Gutknecht; Rene Franzen
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2013-03-24       Impact factor: 3.161

10.  Effects of CO(2) laser debonding of a ceramic bracket on the mechanical properties of enamel.

Authors:  Masahiro Iijima; Yoshitaka Yasuda; Takeshi Muguruma; Itaru Mizoguchi
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.