Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512015000200061 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: To assess enamel surface under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after resin removal and enamel polishing procedures following brackets debonding, as well as compare the time required for these procedures. METHODS: A total of 180 deciduous bovine incisors were used. The enamel surface of each tooth was prepared and brackets were bonded with light cured Transbond XT composite resin. Brackets were removed in a testing machine. The samples were randomized and equally distributed into nine groups according to the resin removal and polishing technique: Group 1, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed; Group 2, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by a sequence of 4 Sof-lex polishing discs (3M); Group 3, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips (Dentsply). All groups were subdivided into (a) unpolished; (b) polished with aluminum oxide paste; and (c) polished with water slurry of fine pumice. Subsequently, the enamel surface was assessed and statistical analysis was carried out. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in enamel roughness and removal time among all groups. Groups 3a, 3b and 3c appeared to be the most efficient methods of removing resin with low damages to enamel. Groups 2a, 2b and 2c were the most time consuming procedures, and Group 2a caused more damages to enamel. CONCLUSION: The suggested protocol for resin removal is the 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips and polishing with aluminum oxide paste. This procedure seems to produce less damages and is less time consuming. |
id |
DPI-1_9284f31f2348c9faeac3c46771218de6 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2176-94512015000200061 |
network_acronym_str |
DPI-1 |
network_name_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methodsDental enamelDental debondingDental polishing OBJECTIVE: To assess enamel surface under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after resin removal and enamel polishing procedures following brackets debonding, as well as compare the time required for these procedures. METHODS: A total of 180 deciduous bovine incisors were used. The enamel surface of each tooth was prepared and brackets were bonded with light cured Transbond XT composite resin. Brackets were removed in a testing machine. The samples were randomized and equally distributed into nine groups according to the resin removal and polishing technique: Group 1, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed; Group 2, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by a sequence of 4 Sof-lex polishing discs (3M); Group 3, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips (Dentsply). All groups were subdivided into (a) unpolished; (b) polished with aluminum oxide paste; and (c) polished with water slurry of fine pumice. Subsequently, the enamel surface was assessed and statistical analysis was carried out. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in enamel roughness and removal time among all groups. Groups 3a, 3b and 3c appeared to be the most efficient methods of removing resin with low damages to enamel. Groups 2a, 2b and 2c were the most time consuming procedures, and Group 2a caused more damages to enamel. CONCLUSION: The suggested protocol for resin removal is the 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips and polishing with aluminum oxide paste. This procedure seems to produce less damages and is less time consuming. Dental Press International2015-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512015000200061Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.20 n.2 2015reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodonticsinstname:Dental Press International (DPI)instacron:DPI10.1590/2176-9451.20.2.061-067.oarinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVidor,Michele MachadoFelix,Rafael PerdomoMarchioro,Ernani MenezesHahn,Lucianeeng2015-09-01T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2176-94512015000200061Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/dpjoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpartigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com2177-67092176-9451opendoar:2015-09-01T00:00Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
title |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
spellingShingle |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods Vidor,Michele Machado Dental enamel Dental debonding Dental polishing |
title_short |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
title_full |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
title_fullStr |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
title_full_unstemmed |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
title_sort |
Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods |
author |
Vidor,Michele Machado |
author_facet |
Vidor,Michele Machado Felix,Rafael Perdomo Marchioro,Ernani Menezes Hahn,Luciane |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Felix,Rafael Perdomo Marchioro,Ernani Menezes Hahn,Luciane |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Vidor,Michele Machado Felix,Rafael Perdomo Marchioro,Ernani Menezes Hahn,Luciane |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dental enamel Dental debonding Dental polishing |
topic |
Dental enamel Dental debonding Dental polishing |
description |
OBJECTIVE: To assess enamel surface under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after resin removal and enamel polishing procedures following brackets debonding, as well as compare the time required for these procedures. METHODS: A total of 180 deciduous bovine incisors were used. The enamel surface of each tooth was prepared and brackets were bonded with light cured Transbond XT composite resin. Brackets were removed in a testing machine. The samples were randomized and equally distributed into nine groups according to the resin removal and polishing technique: Group 1, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed; Group 2, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by a sequence of 4 Sof-lex polishing discs (3M); Group 3, 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips (Dentsply). All groups were subdivided into (a) unpolished; (b) polished with aluminum oxide paste; and (c) polished with water slurry of fine pumice. Subsequently, the enamel surface was assessed and statistical analysis was carried out. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in enamel roughness and removal time among all groups. Groups 3a, 3b and 3c appeared to be the most efficient methods of removing resin with low damages to enamel. Groups 2a, 2b and 2c were the most time consuming procedures, and Group 2a caused more damages to enamel. CONCLUSION: The suggested protocol for resin removal is the 30-blade tungsten carbide bur in high speed followed by Enhance tips and polishing with aluminum oxide paste. This procedure seems to produce less damages and is less time consuming. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-04-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512015000200061 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512015000200061 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/2176-9451.20.2.061-067.oar |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.20 n.2 2015 reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics instname:Dental Press International (DPI) instacron:DPI |
instname_str |
Dental Press International (DPI) |
instacron_str |
DPI |
institution |
DPI |
reponame_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
collection |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
artigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com |
_version_ |
1754122397239214080 |