DESCRIPTION OF THE TECHNIQUE: The microabrasion technique of enamel consists of selectively abrading the discolored areas or causing superficial structural changes in a selective way. OBJECTIVE: In microabrasion technique, abrasive products associated with acids are used, and the evaluation of enamel roughness after this treatment, as well as surface polishing, is necessary. This in-vitro study evaluated the enamel roughness after microabrasion, followed by different polishing techniques. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Roughness analyses were performed before microabrasion (L1), after microabrasion (L2), and after polishing (L3).Thus, 60 bovine incisive teeth divided into two groups were selected (n=30): G1- 37% phosphoric acid (37%) (Dentsply) and pumice; G2- hydrochloric acid (6.6%) associated with silicon carbide (Opalustre - Ultradent). Thereafter, the groups were divided into three sub-groups (n=10), according to the system of polishing: A - Fine and superfine granulation aluminum oxide discs (SofLex 3M); B - Diamond Paste (FGM) associated with felt discs (FGM); C - Silicone tips (Enhance - Dentsply). A PROC MIXED procedure was applied after data exploratory analysis, as well as the Tukey-Kramer test (5%). RESULTS: No statistical differences were found between G1 and G2 groups. L2 differed statistically from L1 and showed superior amounts of roughness. Differences in the amounts of post-polishing roughness for specific groups (1A, 2B, and 1C) arose, which demonstrated less roughness in L3 and differed statistically from L2 in the polishing system. CONCLUSION: All products increased enamel roughness, and the effectiveness of the polishing systems was dependent upon the abrasive used.
DESCRIPTION OF THE TECHNIQUE: The microabrasion technique of enamel consists of selectively abrading the discolored areas or causing superficial structural changes in a selective way. OBJECTIVE: In microabrasion technique, abrasive products associated with acids are used, and the evaluation of enamel roughness after this treatment, as well as surface polishing, is necessary. This in-vitro study evaluated the enamel roughness after microabrasion, followed by different polishing techniques. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Roughness analyses were performed before microabrasion (L1), after microabrasion (L2), and after polishing (L3).Thus, 60 bovine incisive teeth divided into two groups were selected (n=30): G1- 37% phosphoric acid (37%) (Dentsply) and pumice; G2- hydrochloric acid (6.6%) associated with silicon carbide (Opalustre - Ultradent). Thereafter, the groups were divided into three sub-groups (n=10), according to the system of polishing: A - Fine and superfine granulation aluminum oxide discs (SofLex 3M); B - Diamond Paste (FGM) associated with felt discs (FGM); C - Silicone tips (Enhance - Dentsply). A PROC MIXED procedure was applied after data exploratory analysis, as well as the Tukey-Kramer test (5%). RESULTS: No statistical differences were found between G1 and G2 groups. L2 differed statistically from L1 and showed superior amounts of roughness. Differences in the amounts of post-polishing roughness for specific groups (1A, 2B, and 1C) arose, which demonstrated less roughness in L3 and differed statistically from L2 in the polishing system. CONCLUSION: All products increased enamel roughness, and the effectiveness of the polishing systems was dependent upon the abrasive used.