Cargando…

Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets

The aim of this study was to compare the demineralizations of the enamel surfaces around different types of orthodontic brackets in an artificial cariogenic environment. A total of 90 extracted human maxillary first premolar teeth were used in this in vitro study. The teeth were divided into 6 group...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Toz Ertop, Melis, Cicek, Orhan, Erener, Hande, Ozkalayci, Nurhat, Demir Cicek, Busra, Comert, Fusun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9917947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769990
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16030984
_version_ 1784886491577581568
author Toz Ertop, Melis
Cicek, Orhan
Erener, Hande
Ozkalayci, Nurhat
Demir Cicek, Busra
Comert, Fusun
author_facet Toz Ertop, Melis
Cicek, Orhan
Erener, Hande
Ozkalayci, Nurhat
Demir Cicek, Busra
Comert, Fusun
author_sort Toz Ertop, Melis
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare the demineralizations of the enamel surfaces around different types of orthodontic brackets in an artificial cariogenic environment. A total of 90 extracted human maxillary first premolar teeth were used in this in vitro study. The teeth were divided into 6 groups, 5 study and 1 control, each consisting of 15 samples. Victory metal, Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic, APC Clarity Advanced ceramic and Clarity Advanced ceramic brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) used in the study groups were bonded to the teeth with the direct technique. The gingival, occlusal and proximal enamel surfaces adjacent to the brackets were measured with a DIAGNOdent pen (KaVo, Biberach, Germany) (T0). Then, the teeth were placed in a cariogenic suspension environment containing Streptococcus mutans, sucrose and artificial saliva. The teeth were removed from the cariogenic suspension at the end of 28 days. Enamel surfaces were remeasured with DIAGNOdent and the values were recorded (T1). Whether the obtained data were homogeneously distributed or not was determined by the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, within-group comparisons were performed with the Wilcoxon test, and between-group comparisons were performed with Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Significance level was accepted as p < 0.05. In all groups, the demineralization values of the enamel surfaces in the gingival, proximal and occlusal surfaces adjacent to the brackets were significantly higher in the T1 period than in the T0 period (p < 0.05). In the T1 period of Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic and Clarity advanced ceramic bracket groups, the demineralization values of the proximal enamel surfaces were found to be significantly higher than the Victory metal and APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups (p < 0.05). In the T1 period, the demineralization values of the occlusal enamel surfaces of the Victory metal, APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups and control group were significantly lower than the Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic and Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups (p < 0.05). Significant increases in enamel demineralization values were observed as a consequence of increased retention areas for microbial dental plaque on enamel surfaces adjacent to the bracket. Considering the importance of minimizing enamel demineralization in fixed orthodontic treatments, less enamel demineralization in Victory metal and APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups showed that these brackets can be preferred in patients with poor oral hygiene.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9917947
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99179472023-02-11 Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets Toz Ertop, Melis Cicek, Orhan Erener, Hande Ozkalayci, Nurhat Demir Cicek, Busra Comert, Fusun Materials (Basel) Article The aim of this study was to compare the demineralizations of the enamel surfaces around different types of orthodontic brackets in an artificial cariogenic environment. A total of 90 extracted human maxillary first premolar teeth were used in this in vitro study. The teeth were divided into 6 groups, 5 study and 1 control, each consisting of 15 samples. Victory metal, Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic, APC Clarity Advanced ceramic and Clarity Advanced ceramic brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) used in the study groups were bonded to the teeth with the direct technique. The gingival, occlusal and proximal enamel surfaces adjacent to the brackets were measured with a DIAGNOdent pen (KaVo, Biberach, Germany) (T0). Then, the teeth were placed in a cariogenic suspension environment containing Streptococcus mutans, sucrose and artificial saliva. The teeth were removed from the cariogenic suspension at the end of 28 days. Enamel surfaces were remeasured with DIAGNOdent and the values were recorded (T1). Whether the obtained data were homogeneously distributed or not was determined by the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, within-group comparisons were performed with the Wilcoxon test, and between-group comparisons were performed with Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Significance level was accepted as p < 0.05. In all groups, the demineralization values of the enamel surfaces in the gingival, proximal and occlusal surfaces adjacent to the brackets were significantly higher in the T1 period than in the T0 period (p < 0.05). In the T1 period of Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic and Clarity advanced ceramic bracket groups, the demineralization values of the proximal enamel surfaces were found to be significantly higher than the Victory metal and APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups (p < 0.05). In the T1 period, the demineralization values of the occlusal enamel surfaces of the Victory metal, APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups and control group were significantly lower than the Gemini metal, Clarity self-ligating ceramic and Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups (p < 0.05). Significant increases in enamel demineralization values were observed as a consequence of increased retention areas for microbial dental plaque on enamel surfaces adjacent to the bracket. Considering the importance of minimizing enamel demineralization in fixed orthodontic treatments, less enamel demineralization in Victory metal and APC Clarity Advanced ceramic bracket groups showed that these brackets can be preferred in patients with poor oral hygiene. MDPI 2023-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9917947/ /pubmed/36769990 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16030984 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
Toz Ertop, Melis
Cicek, Orhan
Erener, Hande
Ozkalayci, Nurhat
Demir Cicek, Busra
Comert, Fusun
Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title_full Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title_fullStr Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title_short Evaluation of the Demineralization Development around Different Types of Orthodontic Brackets
title_sort evaluation of the demineralization development around different types of orthodontic brackets
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9917947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769990
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16030984
work_keys_str_mv AT tozertopmelis evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets
AT cicekorhan evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets
AT erenerhande evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets
AT ozkalaycinurhat evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets
AT demircicekbusra evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets
AT comertfusun evaluationofthedemineralizationdevelopmentarounddifferenttypesoforthodonticbrackets