Cargando…

Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive

The aim of this study was to evaluate enamel roughness, quality of the enamel surfaces and time duration comparing different orthodontic adhesive removal protocols. Premolars were used to test three adhesive removal methods (n = 20): five-blade carbide bur, 30-blade carbide bur, and ultrasonic diamo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach, Genari, Bruna, Ferrazzo, Vilmar Antonio, dos Santos-Pinto, Ary, Grehs, Renésio Armindo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6162712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30082662
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj6030039
_version_ 1783359202691907584
author Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach
Genari, Bruna
Ferrazzo, Vilmar Antonio
dos Santos-Pinto, Ary
Grehs, Renésio Armindo
author_facet Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach
Genari, Bruna
Ferrazzo, Vilmar Antonio
dos Santos-Pinto, Ary
Grehs, Renésio Armindo
author_sort Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to evaluate enamel roughness, quality of the enamel surfaces and time duration comparing different orthodontic adhesive removal protocols. Premolars were used to test three adhesive removal methods (n = 20): five-blade carbide bur, 30-blade carbide bur, and ultrasonic diamond bur. Bracket was bonded using Transbond(TM) XT adhesive. Roughness with different parameters was measured before bracket bonding and after adhesive remnants removal. Micromorphological analysis of enamel surface (n = 5) was performed by SEM images and categorized in enamel damage index—“perfect”; “satisfying”; “imperfect”; and “unacceptable”. Time was measured in seconds. All removal methods caused increased roughness in relation to R(a), R(q), and R(z) parameters (X axis) comparing to healthy enamel surface. Enamel surface resulted from removal using five-blade burs was scored as satisfactory. Carbide bur groups decreased the roughness values of R(a), R(q), and R(z) parameters on the Y axis and enamel surface was considered unacceptable. The 30-blade group increased symmetry (R(sk)) and flattening (R(ku)) parameters of roughness and surface was scored as unsatisfactory. Diamond bur removed adhesive in 54.8 s, faster than five-blade carbide bur. The five-blade bur group resulted in less enamel roughness than the 30-blade and diamond groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6162712
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61627122018-10-09 Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach Genari, Bruna Ferrazzo, Vilmar Antonio dos Santos-Pinto, Ary Grehs, Renésio Armindo Dent J (Basel) Article The aim of this study was to evaluate enamel roughness, quality of the enamel surfaces and time duration comparing different orthodontic adhesive removal protocols. Premolars were used to test three adhesive removal methods (n = 20): five-blade carbide bur, 30-blade carbide bur, and ultrasonic diamond bur. Bracket was bonded using Transbond(TM) XT adhesive. Roughness with different parameters was measured before bracket bonding and after adhesive remnants removal. Micromorphological analysis of enamel surface (n = 5) was performed by SEM images and categorized in enamel damage index—“perfect”; “satisfying”; “imperfect”; and “unacceptable”. Time was measured in seconds. All removal methods caused increased roughness in relation to R(a), R(q), and R(z) parameters (X axis) comparing to healthy enamel surface. Enamel surface resulted from removal using five-blade burs was scored as satisfactory. Carbide bur groups decreased the roughness values of R(a), R(q), and R(z) parameters on the Y axis and enamel surface was considered unacceptable. The 30-blade group increased symmetry (R(sk)) and flattening (R(ku)) parameters of roughness and surface was scored as unsatisfactory. Diamond bur removed adhesive in 54.8 s, faster than five-blade carbide bur. The five-blade bur group resulted in less enamel roughness than the 30-blade and diamond groups. MDPI 2018-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6162712/ /pubmed/30082662 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj6030039 Text en © 2018 by the authors. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Degrazia, Felipe Weidenbach
Genari, Bruna
Ferrazzo, Vilmar Antonio
dos Santos-Pinto, Ary
Grehs, Renésio Armindo
Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title_full Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title_fullStr Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title_full_unstemmed Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title_short Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive
title_sort enamel roughness changes after removal of orthodontic adhesive
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6162712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30082662
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj6030039
work_keys_str_mv AT degraziafelipeweidenbach enamelroughnesschangesafterremovaloforthodonticadhesive
AT genaribruna enamelroughnesschangesafterremovaloforthodonticadhesive
AT ferrazzovilmarantonio enamelroughnesschangesafterremovaloforthodonticadhesive
AT dossantospintoary enamelroughnesschangesafterremovaloforthodonticadhesive
AT grehsrenesioarmindo enamelroughnesschangesafterremovaloforthodonticadhesive