Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods
Purpose: Adhesive remnants removal is the last key step influencing orthodontic treatment outcomes. Four different clearance methods (CM) of orthodontic adhesive were evaluated to determine, which achieved the smoothest enamel surface in the shortest time.Materials and Methods: 75 intact premolars e...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Istanbul University
2024-09-01
|
| Series: | European Oral Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/B3E6FD45917D4313B97A78597C2FF69F |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850281487389163520 |
|---|---|
| author | Denisa Raticová Magadalena Koťová Aleš Bezrouk Leo Sala Petra Křížová Leger Aleš Wanda Urbanová |
| author_facet | Denisa Raticová Magadalena Koťová Aleš Bezrouk Leo Sala Petra Křížová Leger Aleš Wanda Urbanová |
| author_sort | Denisa Raticová |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose: Adhesive remnants removal is the last key step influencing orthodontic treatment outcomes. Four different clearance methods (CM) of orthodontic adhesive were evaluated to determine, which achieved the smoothest enamel surface in the shortest time.Materials and Methods: 75 intact premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were included, sixty had an orthodontic bracket bonded and subsequently removed, and fifteen served as the control group. Four CMs were used to clear the tooth surface of 15 premolars each: carbide bur (CB), carbide bur with titanium nitride surface treatment + fine carbide bur (CBCB), glass fiber-reinforced composite instrument (GFCB), zirconia bur + glass fiber-reinforced composite bur (ZBCB). The processing time was recorded. In ten premolars from each group, the enamel surface was evaluated by atomic force microscopy estimating mean roughness (Ra), roughness profile value (Rq), and roughness depth (Rt). Enamel Damage Index (EDI) was assessed with a scanning electron microscope on 5 remaining premolars.Results: Significant differences were observed in all evaluated parameters - Ra (p<0.0001), Rq (p<0.0001), and Rt (p<0.0001). GFCB exhibited the smoothest surface in all parameters. The lowest EDI exhibited teeth treated by GFCB, however, the differences were not significant. Working with GFCB took the longest time (mean 116s), and the shortest with CBCB (mean 49s).Conclusion: Using CB is the fastest clearance method, but the enamel surface roughness was highest. Clearing with a set of instruments CBCB proved to be a fast method with satisfying remaining enamel roughness. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c2d06df8a26346f9a8e8b98d17157035 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2651-2823 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-09-01 |
| publisher | Istanbul University |
| record_format | Article |
| series | European Oral Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-c2d06df8a26346f9a8e8b98d171570352025-08-20T01:48:16ZengIstanbul UniversityEuropean Oral Research2651-28232024-09-0158314515110.26650/eor.20241436650123456Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methodsDenisa Raticová0https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9363-8498Magadalena Koťová1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6660-9789Aleš Bezrouk2https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2397-3847Leo Salahttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1091-4386Petra Křížová3https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7607-9665Leger Aleš4https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9929-598XWanda Urbanová5https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3796-5848Charles University, Prague, CzechiaCharles University, Prague, CzechiaCharles University, Prague, CzechiaCharles University, Prague, CzechiaCharles University, Prague, CzechiaCharles University, Prague, CzechiaPurpose: Adhesive remnants removal is the last key step influencing orthodontic treatment outcomes. Four different clearance methods (CM) of orthodontic adhesive were evaluated to determine, which achieved the smoothest enamel surface in the shortest time.Materials and Methods: 75 intact premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were included, sixty had an orthodontic bracket bonded and subsequently removed, and fifteen served as the control group. Four CMs were used to clear the tooth surface of 15 premolars each: carbide bur (CB), carbide bur with titanium nitride surface treatment + fine carbide bur (CBCB), glass fiber-reinforced composite instrument (GFCB), zirconia bur + glass fiber-reinforced composite bur (ZBCB). The processing time was recorded. In ten premolars from each group, the enamel surface was evaluated by atomic force microscopy estimating mean roughness (Ra), roughness profile value (Rq), and roughness depth (Rt). Enamel Damage Index (EDI) was assessed with a scanning electron microscope on 5 remaining premolars.Results: Significant differences were observed in all evaluated parameters - Ra (p<0.0001), Rq (p<0.0001), and Rt (p<0.0001). GFCB exhibited the smoothest surface in all parameters. The lowest EDI exhibited teeth treated by GFCB, however, the differences were not significant. Working with GFCB took the longest time (mean 116s), and the shortest with CBCB (mean 49s).Conclusion: Using CB is the fastest clearance method, but the enamel surface roughness was highest. Clearing with a set of instruments CBCB proved to be a fast method with satisfying remaining enamel roughness.https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/B3E6FD45917D4313B97A78597C2FF69Fenamel roughnessclearance methodorthodonticsadhesivetooth surface |
| spellingShingle | Denisa Raticová Magadalena Koťová Aleš Bezrouk Leo Sala Petra Křížová Leger Aleš Wanda Urbanová Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods European Oral Research enamel roughness clearance method orthodontics adhesive tooth surface |
| title | Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| title_full | Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| title_fullStr | Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| title_full_unstemmed | Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| title_short | Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| title_sort | enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods |
| topic | enamel roughness clearance method orthodontics adhesive tooth surface |
| url | https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/B3E6FD45917D4313B97A78597C2FF69F |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT denisaraticova enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT magadalenakotova enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT alesbezrouk enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT leosala enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT petrakrizova enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT legerales enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods AT wandaurbanova enamelsurfaceroughnessafterorthodonticadhesiveremovalaninvitrostudycomparingfourclearancemethods |