Does staining orthodontic adhesive provide an advantage in adhesive resin removal and enamel roughness? An in vitro study

IF 1.8 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
{"title":"Does staining orthodontic adhesive provide an advantage in adhesive resin removal and enamel roughness? An in vitro study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ortho.2024.100915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The removal of adhesive remnants after bracket debonding has been shown to cause damaging effects on the enamel surface. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of stained adhesive remnant removal (ARR) on enamel roughness compared to translucent composite.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Thirty extracted premolar teeth were divided equally into three groups; conventional composite control group (CC), stained composite group (SC) and stained bonding solution group (SB). The buccal surface of each tooth was cleaned, dried and the surface roughness (Ra) was evaluated using a contact prophylometer (T0). After bracket debonding, a high-speed carbide bur under a water-cooling system was used for ARR in one direction and the time consumed for ARR was recorded. After ARR, the second mean Ra values were recorded (T1). The samples were then polished using polishing paste with low-speed rubber cup and the third mean Ra values were recorded (T2).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Repeated one-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference in the mean Ra values at T0, T1 and T2 within each group <em>P</em> <!-->˂<!--> <!-->0.05. A statistically significant difference in the changes of the mean Ra values after ARR (T1–T0) and after polishing (T1–T2) was found between the CC group and both SC and SB groups. A significant difference in the time consumed for ARR was found between the three groups with CC group being the most time-consuming group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Stained composite material followed by the stained bonding solution provided better visibility during ARR with lower mean Ra values and less time for ARR compared totranslucent composite material.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45449,"journal":{"name":"International Orthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1761722724000718","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The removal of adhesive remnants after bracket debonding has been shown to cause damaging effects on the enamel surface. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of stained adhesive remnant removal (ARR) on enamel roughness compared to translucent composite.

Material and methods

Thirty extracted premolar teeth were divided equally into three groups; conventional composite control group (CC), stained composite group (SC) and stained bonding solution group (SB). The buccal surface of each tooth was cleaned, dried and the surface roughness (Ra) was evaluated using a contact prophylometer (T0). After bracket debonding, a high-speed carbide bur under a water-cooling system was used for ARR in one direction and the time consumed for ARR was recorded. After ARR, the second mean Ra values were recorded (T1). The samples were then polished using polishing paste with low-speed rubber cup and the third mean Ra values were recorded (T2).

Results

Repeated one-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference in the mean Ra values at T0, T1 and T2 within each group P ˂ 0.05. A statistically significant difference in the changes of the mean Ra values after ARR (T1–T0) and after polishing (T1–T2) was found between the CC group and both SC and SB groups. A significant difference in the time consumed for ARR was found between the three groups with CC group being the most time-consuming group.

Conclusion

Stained composite material followed by the stained bonding solution provided better visibility during ARR with lower mean Ra values and less time for ARR compared totranslucent composite material.

染色正畸粘合剂在粘合树脂去除和釉质粗糙度方面是否具有优势?一项体外研究。
背景:研究表明,去除托槽脱粘后的残余粘接剂会对牙釉质表面造成损害。本研究旨在探讨染色残余粘接剂去除(ARR)与半透明复合材料相比对牙釉质粗糙度的影响:将 30 颗拔除的前臼齿平均分为三组:传统复合材料对照组(CC)、染色复合材料组(SC)和染色粘接剂组(SB)。每颗牙齿的颊面都经过清洁、干燥,并使用接触式温度计(T0)评估表面粗糙度(Ra)。托槽脱粘后,在水冷系统下使用高速硬质合金钻头进行单向 ARR,并记录 ARR 所消耗的时间。ARR 之后,记录第二个平均 Ra 值(T1)。然后使用抛光膏和低速橡胶杯对样品进行抛光,记录第三次平均 Ra 值(T2):结果:重复单因素方差分析显示,各组在 T0、T1 和 T2 时的平均 Ra 值差异显著,P˂0.05。CC 组与 SC 组和 SB 组在 ARR(T1-T0)和抛光(T1-T2)后的平均 Ra 值变化差异有统计学意义。三组之间在 ARR 所耗时间上存在明显差异,其中 CC 组耗时最长:结论:与半透明复合材料相比,染色复合材料和染色粘接剂能在 ARR 过程中提供更好的能见度,平均 Ra 值更低,ARR 耗时更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Orthodontics
International Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
13.30%
发文量
71
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: Une revue de référence dans le domaine de orthodontie et des disciplines frontières Your reference in dentofacial orthopedics International Orthodontics adresse aux orthodontistes, aux dentistes, aux stomatologistes, aux chirurgiens maxillo-faciaux et aux plasticiens de la face, ainsi quà leurs assistant(e)s. International Orthodontics is addressed to orthodontists, dentists, stomatologists, maxillofacial surgeons and facial plastic surgeons, as well as their assistants.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信