{"title":"不同陶瓷托槽脱粘技术的评价(一项体外研究)","authors":"A. Khalil, Nazla Tamish, Ahmed R. Elkalza","doi":"10.21608/eos.2021.105244.1033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare different techniques for debonding of ceramic brackets in terms of adhesive remnant index (ARI). Material and methods: A sample of 100 extracted human premolars were randomly and equally allocated into 5 groups of 20. Thereafter, monocrystalline ceramic brackets were bonded to teeth using light cure composite resin. Among the 5 groups; group I: served as control, group II: chemical assisted debonding using peppermint oil, group III: ultrasonic assisted debonding, group IV: diode laser assisted debonding, and group V: Er: YAG laser assisted debonding. Brackets were then debonded using a universal testing machine, followed by ARI assessment. Results: A statistically significant higher ARI scores was found solely in Er:YAG laser assisted debonding. Yet, no significant difference was found with chemical, ultrasonic, and diode laser assisted debonding. Conclusion: Er:YAG laser could be effective for debonding of ceramic brackets. Hence, this method might be recommended to alleviate enamel damage.","PeriodicalId":305086,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES FOR DEBONDING OF CERAMIC BRACKETS (AN IN VITRO STUDY)\",\"authors\":\"A. Khalil, Nazla Tamish, Ahmed R. Elkalza\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/eos.2021.105244.1033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To compare different techniques for debonding of ceramic brackets in terms of adhesive remnant index (ARI). Material and methods: A sample of 100 extracted human premolars were randomly and equally allocated into 5 groups of 20. Thereafter, monocrystalline ceramic brackets were bonded to teeth using light cure composite resin. Among the 5 groups; group I: served as control, group II: chemical assisted debonding using peppermint oil, group III: ultrasonic assisted debonding, group IV: diode laser assisted debonding, and group V: Er: YAG laser assisted debonding. Brackets were then debonded using a universal testing machine, followed by ARI assessment. Results: A statistically significant higher ARI scores was found solely in Er:YAG laser assisted debonding. Yet, no significant difference was found with chemical, ultrasonic, and diode laser assisted debonding. Conclusion: Er:YAG laser could be effective for debonding of ceramic brackets. Hence, this method might be recommended to alleviate enamel damage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":305086,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/eos.2021.105244.1033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Orthodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/eos.2021.105244.1033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES FOR DEBONDING OF CERAMIC BRACKETS (AN IN VITRO STUDY)
Objective: To compare different techniques for debonding of ceramic brackets in terms of adhesive remnant index (ARI). Material and methods: A sample of 100 extracted human premolars were randomly and equally allocated into 5 groups of 20. Thereafter, monocrystalline ceramic brackets were bonded to teeth using light cure composite resin. Among the 5 groups; group I: served as control, group II: chemical assisted debonding using peppermint oil, group III: ultrasonic assisted debonding, group IV: diode laser assisted debonding, and group V: Er: YAG laser assisted debonding. Brackets were then debonded using a universal testing machine, followed by ARI assessment. Results: A statistically significant higher ARI scores was found solely in Er:YAG laser assisted debonding. Yet, no significant difference was found with chemical, ultrasonic, and diode laser assisted debonding. Conclusion: Er:YAG laser could be effective for debonding of ceramic brackets. Hence, this method might be recommended to alleviate enamel damage.