Damage on tooth enamel after removal of orthodontic adhesive by Arkansas’ stone and tungsten carbide burs

• Autor(a) principal: Pinho, Mónica Morado
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Outros Autores: Pinto, Gustavo F. V., Mesquita, Pedro, Silva, Filipe Samuel, Souza, Júlio C. M., Ferreira, Afonso Pinhão, Henriques, Bruno Alexandre Pacheco de Castro
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/65749
• topic: Brackets; Enamel damage; Orthodontic adhesives; Science & Technology

Objectives: The main aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two different methods to remove orthodontic composite adhesives from enamel concerning the surface damage and remnant composite adhesive on the surfaces. Methods: Human molars were stored in buffer solution at room temperature before bonding the brackets. Teeth were ultrasonically cleaned in distilled water before bonding procedure. Ninety two brackets were randomly bonded to the buccal surface of twenty three molars using a composite-based adhesive system. After 15 days, the orthodontic composite adhesives were removed by using Arkansas' stone or multi-blade tungsten burs. After debonding process, the remnant composite adhered to the tooth as well as the teeth surfaces were analyzed by photographic images at x40 magnification concerning the (ARI) adhesive remnant or (SRI) surface roughness index. Also, enamel surfaces were inspected by field emission guns scanning electron microscopy (FEGSEM) before bonding and after bracket detachment. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS® Statistics vs.18.0, considering a significance level of 0.05 to one-way ANOVA. Tukey's test was used for multiple comparisons and Chi-square tests were used to analyze the association between categorical variables. Results: ARI results revealed no statistically significant differences between the two methods of bracket removal (p=0.283). Considering SRI, statistically significant differences were detected between the two procedures (p<0.001) considering all worn surfaces revealed lower surface roughness after removal of adhesive by Arkansas stone than that recorded on worn surfaces after removal using tungsten carbide burs. Conclusion: The removal of orthodontic adhesive promoted less damage on enamel surfaces by using Arkansas stone at low rotation. Nevertheless, finishing procedures can decrease the roughness on enamel without additional damage.