Cargando…

Impact of polishing system on surface roughness of different ceramic surfaces after various pretreatments and bracket debonding

OBJECTIVE: Evaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Zirconia (ZrO2), leucite (LEU) and lithium disilicate (LiSi) specimens were pretreated with a) silica coated alumina parti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jungbauer, Rebecca, Liebermann, Anja, Hammer, Christian M., Edelhoff, Daniel, Proff, Peter, Stawarczyk, Bogna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10415457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37166534
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05058-3
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Evaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Zirconia (ZrO2), leucite (LEU) and lithium disilicate (LiSi) specimens were pretreated with a) silica coated alumina particles (CoJet); LEU and LiSi additionally with b) hydrofluoric acid (HF), c) Monobond Etch&Prime (MEP), d) silicium carbide grinder (SiC) before bracket bonding, shearing off, ARI evaluation, excessive attachment material removal and polishing with i) Sof-Lex Discs (Soflex), ii) polishing paste (Paste), iii) polishing set (Set). Before/after polishing surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a profilometer. Martens hardness parameter were also assessed. RESULTS: Irrespective of pretreatment Ra of LEU increased the most, followed by LiSi and ZrO2 (p < 0.001, SiC: p = 0.012), in accordance with the measured Martens hardness parameter. CoJet/SiC caused greater roughness as HF/MEP (p < 0.001). The ZrO2 surface was rougher after polishing with Paste/Set (p < 0.001; p = 0.047). Ra improved in the LEU/CoJet, LEU/SiC and LiSi/SiC groups with Soflex/Set (p < 0.001), in the LiSi/CoJet and LEU/HF groups by Soflex (p = 0.003, p < 0.001) and worsened by Paste (p = 0.017, p < 0.001). Polishing of HF or MEP pretreated LiSi with Set increased Ra (p = 0.001, p < 0.001), so did Paste in the LEU/MEP group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Paste couldn’t improve the surfaces. Soflex was the only method decreasing Ra on rough surfaces and not causing roughness worsening. Polishing of LEU/LiSi after MEP, LEU after HF pretreatment doesn´t seem to have any benefit. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To avoid long-term damage to ceramic restorations, special attention should be paid to the polishing method after orthodontic treatment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00784-023-05058-3.