Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.54553 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/228515 |
Resumo: | Background: The bonding of accessories in the dental crown during the orthodontic treatment creates microporosities, thus promoting micromechanical retention of the adhesive to the enamel structure. After debonding brackets, at the end of the active orthodontic treatment, a certain amount of adhesive remnants must be mechanically removed from the enamel. The objective of this study was to compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy, three different methods to remove the adhesive remnants after orthodontic bracket removal. Material and Methods: An experimental analytical study was conducted on human premolar specimens, extracted within a year or less. The preparation of the enamel was carried out with the application of 35% phosphoric acid and Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive Primer® adhesive. Edgwise Standart prescription brackets, slot .022 (Morelli Orthodontia) were glued to the enamel using Transbond XT® bonding resin. The brackets were placed on the center of the vestibular face of the clinical crown, and a 300-gram pressure was exerted against the surface of the enamel, measured with an orthodontic dynamometer. The brackets were debonded with adhesive removing pliers, and the samples were divided into groups, according to the protocol used for adhesive remnant removal: high-speed multi-laminated drill bit, low-speed multi-laminated drill bit, and low-speed glass fiber. After removal of the adhesive remnants, the samples went through scanning electron microscopy, obtaining electro micrographs with a magnification range of 150 X, 500 X, and 2,000 X. Results: The tested method showed that the best effectiveness for the removal of the adhesive remnants after bracket debonding was the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated high speed, followed by the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated, low-rotation drill. The use of fiberglass drill alone has proved to be inefficient for clinical use, given the large amounts of adhesive remnants it leaves on the enamel Conclusions: All methods evaluated in this study proved to be inefficient for total removal of adhesive remnants from the enamel. |
id |
UNSP_d9f035479716066c3f86c0a0c140ccd3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/228515 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnantsDental enamelMicroscopyOrthodonticsBackground: The bonding of accessories in the dental crown during the orthodontic treatment creates microporosities, thus promoting micromechanical retention of the adhesive to the enamel structure. After debonding brackets, at the end of the active orthodontic treatment, a certain amount of adhesive remnants must be mechanically removed from the enamel. The objective of this study was to compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy, three different methods to remove the adhesive remnants after orthodontic bracket removal. Material and Methods: An experimental analytical study was conducted on human premolar specimens, extracted within a year or less. The preparation of the enamel was carried out with the application of 35% phosphoric acid and Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive Primer® adhesive. Edgwise Standart prescription brackets, slot .022 (Morelli Orthodontia) were glued to the enamel using Transbond XT® bonding resin. The brackets were placed on the center of the vestibular face of the clinical crown, and a 300-gram pressure was exerted against the surface of the enamel, measured with an orthodontic dynamometer. The brackets were debonded with adhesive removing pliers, and the samples were divided into groups, according to the protocol used for adhesive remnant removal: high-speed multi-laminated drill bit, low-speed multi-laminated drill bit, and low-speed glass fiber. After removal of the adhesive remnants, the samples went through scanning electron microscopy, obtaining electro micrographs with a magnification range of 150 X, 500 X, and 2,000 X. Results: The tested method showed that the best effectiveness for the removal of the adhesive remnants after bracket debonding was the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated high speed, followed by the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated, low-rotation drill. The use of fiberglass drill alone has proved to be inefficient for clinical use, given the large amounts of adhesive remnants it leaves on the enamel Conclusions: All methods evaluated in this study proved to be inefficient for total removal of adhesive remnants from the enamel.Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences University of Southern Santa CatarinaRestorative Dentistry Department Araraquara Dental School São Paulo State UniversityRestorative Dentistry Department Araraquara Dental School São Paulo State UniversityUniversity of Southern Santa CatarinaUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Claudino, DiksonKuga, Milton-Carlos [UNESP]Belizário, Lauriê [UNESP]Pereira, Jefferson-Ricardo2022-04-29T08:27:13Z2022-04-29T08:27:13Z2018-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlee248-e251http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.54553Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, v. 10, n. 3, p. e248-e251, 2018.1989-5488http://hdl.handle.net/11449/22851510.4317/jced.545532-s2.0-85042783115Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-29T08:27:13Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/228515Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462022-04-29T08:27:13Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
title |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
spellingShingle |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants Claudino, Dikson Dental enamel Microscopy Orthodontics |
title_short |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
title_full |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
title_fullStr |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
title_full_unstemmed |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
title_sort |
Enamel evaluation by scanning electron microscopy after debonding brackets and removal of adhesive remnants |
author |
Claudino, Dikson |
author_facet |
Claudino, Dikson Kuga, Milton-Carlos [UNESP] Belizário, Lauriê [UNESP] Pereira, Jefferson-Ricardo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Kuga, Milton-Carlos [UNESP] Belizário, Lauriê [UNESP] Pereira, Jefferson-Ricardo |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
University of Southern Santa Catarina Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Claudino, Dikson Kuga, Milton-Carlos [UNESP] Belizário, Lauriê [UNESP] Pereira, Jefferson-Ricardo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dental enamel Microscopy Orthodontics |
topic |
Dental enamel Microscopy Orthodontics |
description |
Background: The bonding of accessories in the dental crown during the orthodontic treatment creates microporosities, thus promoting micromechanical retention of the adhesive to the enamel structure. After debonding brackets, at the end of the active orthodontic treatment, a certain amount of adhesive remnants must be mechanically removed from the enamel. The objective of this study was to compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy, three different methods to remove the adhesive remnants after orthodontic bracket removal. Material and Methods: An experimental analytical study was conducted on human premolar specimens, extracted within a year or less. The preparation of the enamel was carried out with the application of 35% phosphoric acid and Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive Primer® adhesive. Edgwise Standart prescription brackets, slot .022 (Morelli Orthodontia) were glued to the enamel using Transbond XT® bonding resin. The brackets were placed on the center of the vestibular face of the clinical crown, and a 300-gram pressure was exerted against the surface of the enamel, measured with an orthodontic dynamometer. The brackets were debonded with adhesive removing pliers, and the samples were divided into groups, according to the protocol used for adhesive remnant removal: high-speed multi-laminated drill bit, low-speed multi-laminated drill bit, and low-speed glass fiber. After removal of the adhesive remnants, the samples went through scanning electron microscopy, obtaining electro micrographs with a magnification range of 150 X, 500 X, and 2,000 X. Results: The tested method showed that the best effectiveness for the removal of the adhesive remnants after bracket debonding was the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated high speed, followed by the use of a tungsten carbide multi-laminated, low-rotation drill. The use of fiberglass drill alone has proved to be inefficient for clinical use, given the large amounts of adhesive remnants it leaves on the enamel Conclusions: All methods evaluated in this study proved to be inefficient for total removal of adhesive remnants from the enamel. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-03-01 2022-04-29T08:27:13Z 2022-04-29T08:27:13Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.54553 Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, v. 10, n. 3, p. e248-e251, 2018. 1989-5488 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/228515 10.4317/jced.54553 2-s2.0-85042783115 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.54553 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/228515 |
identifier_str_mv |
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, v. 10, n. 3, p. e248-e251, 2018. 1989-5488 10.4317/jced.54553 2-s2.0-85042783115 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
e248-e251 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1797789865484484608 |