Cargando…

Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems

This study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Almudhi, Abdullazez, Aldeeri, Arwa, Aloraini, Abdullah Abdulrahman A., Alomar, Ahmed Ibrahim M., Alqudairi, Meshari Saad M., Alzahrani, Osama Abdullah A., Eldwakhly, Elzahraa, AlMugairin, Sarah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37892104
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13203284
_version_ 1785127256749768704
author Almudhi, Abdullazez
Aldeeri, Arwa
Aloraini, Abdullah Abdulrahman A.
Alomar, Ahmed Ibrahim M.
Alqudairi, Meshari Saad M.
Alzahrani, Osama Abdullah A.
Eldwakhly, Elzahraa
AlMugairin, Sarah
author_facet Almudhi, Abdullazez
Aldeeri, Arwa
Aloraini, Abdullah Abdulrahman A.
Alomar, Ahmed Ibrahim M.
Alqudairi, Meshari Saad M.
Alzahrani, Osama Abdullah A.
Eldwakhly, Elzahraa
AlMugairin, Sarah
author_sort Almudhi, Abdullazez
collection PubMed
description This study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket bonding. Brackets were then debonded using bracket-removing pliers. Teeth were randomly assigned to seven groups based on the residual cement removal system: Group 1: Stainbuster bur, Group 2: Renew diamond bur #129, Group 3: Renew carbide bur, Group 4: OneGloss Complete system, Group 5: Sof-Lex system, Group 6: Enhance Finishing and PoGo Polishing complete kit, and Group 7: Renew friction grip points. The enamel surface was evaluated for roughness before bracketing and after residual cement removal using surface profilometry. The time taken for cement removal was recorded using a digital timer, and heat generation was measured using a laser thermometer before and after cement removal. One-way ANOVA compared the pre- and post-values for enamel surface roughness, temperature, and time consumed. When comparing the difference between the post- and pre-finishing roughness using one-way ANOVA, the Renew diamond bur produced the roughest enamel surface post-removal with a mean of 4.716 μm, while the Sof-Lex recorded the lowest at 0.760 μm. The highest mean temperature was recorded with the Stainbuster bur at 5.545 °C, and the lowest temperature was recorded with the Enhance bur at 2.260 °C. The time for cement removal was the shortest with the Enhance bur at 12.2 s, whereas the time was the longest with the Renew diamond bur at 30.4 s. In conclusion, all the residual cement removal systems used in this clinically simulated study were not able to restore the original enamel surface smoothness. However, the 3M Sof-Lex produced the lowest enamel roughness but with more time consumption and heat generation. When selecting the best residual cement removal system to be used, clinicians should weigh the merits and demerits of each system based on the clinical judgement of the operator.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10606188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106061882023-10-28 Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems Almudhi, Abdullazez Aldeeri, Arwa Aloraini, Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Alomar, Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alqudairi, Meshari Saad M. Alzahrani, Osama Abdullah A. Eldwakhly, Elzahraa AlMugairin, Sarah Diagnostics (Basel) Article This study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket bonding. Brackets were then debonded using bracket-removing pliers. Teeth were randomly assigned to seven groups based on the residual cement removal system: Group 1: Stainbuster bur, Group 2: Renew diamond bur #129, Group 3: Renew carbide bur, Group 4: OneGloss Complete system, Group 5: Sof-Lex system, Group 6: Enhance Finishing and PoGo Polishing complete kit, and Group 7: Renew friction grip points. The enamel surface was evaluated for roughness before bracketing and after residual cement removal using surface profilometry. The time taken for cement removal was recorded using a digital timer, and heat generation was measured using a laser thermometer before and after cement removal. One-way ANOVA compared the pre- and post-values for enamel surface roughness, temperature, and time consumed. When comparing the difference between the post- and pre-finishing roughness using one-way ANOVA, the Renew diamond bur produced the roughest enamel surface post-removal with a mean of 4.716 μm, while the Sof-Lex recorded the lowest at 0.760 μm. The highest mean temperature was recorded with the Stainbuster bur at 5.545 °C, and the lowest temperature was recorded with the Enhance bur at 2.260 °C. The time for cement removal was the shortest with the Enhance bur at 12.2 s, whereas the time was the longest with the Renew diamond bur at 30.4 s. In conclusion, all the residual cement removal systems used in this clinically simulated study were not able to restore the original enamel surface smoothness. However, the 3M Sof-Lex produced the lowest enamel roughness but with more time consumption and heat generation. When selecting the best residual cement removal system to be used, clinicians should weigh the merits and demerits of each system based on the clinical judgement of the operator. MDPI 2023-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10606188/ /pubmed/37892104 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13203284 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Almudhi, Abdullazez
Aldeeri, Arwa
Aloraini, Abdullah Abdulrahman A.
Alomar, Ahmed Ibrahim M.
Alqudairi, Meshari Saad M.
Alzahrani, Osama Abdullah A.
Eldwakhly, Elzahraa
AlMugairin, Sarah
Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_full Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_fullStr Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_short Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_sort comparison of enamel surface integrity after de-bracketing as affected by seven different orthodontic residual cement removal systems
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37892104
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13203284
work_keys_str_mv AT almudhiabdullazez comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT aldeeriarwa comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT alorainiabdullahabdulrahmana comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT alomarahmedibrahimm comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT alqudairimesharisaadm comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT alzahraniosamaabdullaha comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT eldwakhlyelzahraa comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT almugairinsarah comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems