Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing

INTRODUCTION: Preserving the dental enamel structure during removal of orthodontic accessories is a clinician's obligation. Hence the search for an evidence based debonding protocol. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate and compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the effects of four different protocols of bracket debonding and subsequent polishing on enamel surface, and to propose a protocol that minimizes damage to enamel surface. METHODS: Twelve bovine permanent incisors were divided into four groups according to the instrument used for debonding and removal of the adhesive remnant. In groups 1 and 2, brackets were debonded with a straight debonding plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA), and in groups 3 and 4, debonding was performed with the instrument Lift-Off (3M Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA). In groups 1 and 3, the adhesive remnant was removed using a long adhesive removing plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA) and in groups 2 and 4, residual adhesive was removed with a tungsten carbide bur (Beavers Dental) at high-speed. After each stage of debonding and polishing, enamel surfaces were replicated and electron micrographs were obtained with 50 and 200X magnification. RESULTS: All four protocols of debonding and polishing caused enamel irregularities. CONCLUSION: Debonding brackets with straight debonding plier, removal of adhesive remnant with a tungsten carbide bur and polishing with pumice and rubber cup was found to be the protocol that caused less damage to enamel surface, therefore this protocol is suggested for debonding brackets.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pignatta,Lilian Maria Brisque, Duarte Júnior,Sillas, Santos,Eduardo César Almada
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Dental Press International 2012
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512012000400017
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S2176-94512012000400017
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S2176-945120120004000172012-10-17Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishingPignatta,Lilian Maria BrisqueDuarte Júnior,SillasSantos,Eduardo César Almada Dental enamel Scanning electron microscopy Orthodontics INTRODUCTION: Preserving the dental enamel structure during removal of orthodontic accessories is a clinician's obligation. Hence the search for an evidence based debonding protocol. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate and compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the effects of four different protocols of bracket debonding and subsequent polishing on enamel surface, and to propose a protocol that minimizes damage to enamel surface. METHODS: Twelve bovine permanent incisors were divided into four groups according to the instrument used for debonding and removal of the adhesive remnant. In groups 1 and 2, brackets were debonded with a straight debonding plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA), and in groups 3 and 4, debonding was performed with the instrument Lift-Off (3M Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA). In groups 1 and 3, the adhesive remnant was removed using a long adhesive removing plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA) and in groups 2 and 4, residual adhesive was removed with a tungsten carbide bur (Beavers Dental) at high-speed. After each stage of debonding and polishing, enamel surfaces were replicated and electron micrographs were obtained with 50 and 200X magnification. RESULTS: All four protocols of debonding and polishing caused enamel irregularities. CONCLUSION: Debonding brackets with straight debonding plier, removal of adhesive remnant with a tungsten carbide bur and polishing with pumice and rubber cup was found to be the protocol that caused less damage to enamel surface, therefore this protocol is suggested for debonding brackets.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessDental Press InternationalDental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.17 n.4 20122012-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512012000400017en10.1590/S2176-94512012000400017
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Pignatta,Lilian Maria Brisque
Duarte Júnior,Sillas
Santos,Eduardo César Almada
spellingShingle Pignatta,Lilian Maria Brisque
Duarte Júnior,Sillas
Santos,Eduardo César Almada
Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
author_facet Pignatta,Lilian Maria Brisque
Duarte Júnior,Sillas
Santos,Eduardo César Almada
author_sort Pignatta,Lilian Maria Brisque
title Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
title_short Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
title_full Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
title_fullStr Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
title_sort evaluation of enamel surface after bracket debonding and polishing
description INTRODUCTION: Preserving the dental enamel structure during removal of orthodontic accessories is a clinician's obligation. Hence the search for an evidence based debonding protocol. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate and compare, by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the effects of four different protocols of bracket debonding and subsequent polishing on enamel surface, and to propose a protocol that minimizes damage to enamel surface. METHODS: Twelve bovine permanent incisors were divided into four groups according to the instrument used for debonding and removal of the adhesive remnant. In groups 1 and 2, brackets were debonded with a straight debonding plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA), and in groups 3 and 4, debonding was performed with the instrument Lift-Off (3M Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA). In groups 1 and 3, the adhesive remnant was removed using a long adhesive removing plier (Ormco Corp., Glendora, California, USA) and in groups 2 and 4, residual adhesive was removed with a tungsten carbide bur (Beavers Dental) at high-speed. After each stage of debonding and polishing, enamel surfaces were replicated and electron micrographs were obtained with 50 and 200X magnification. RESULTS: All four protocols of debonding and polishing caused enamel irregularities. CONCLUSION: Debonding brackets with straight debonding plier, removal of adhesive remnant with a tungsten carbide bur and polishing with pumice and rubber cup was found to be the protocol that caused less damage to enamel surface, therefore this protocol is suggested for debonding brackets.
publisher Dental Press International
publishDate 2012
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512012000400017
work_keys_str_mv AT pignattalilianmariabrisque evaluationofenamelsurfaceafterbracketdebondingandpolishing
AT duartejuniorsillas evaluationofenamelsurfaceafterbracketdebondingandpolishing
AT santoseduardocesaralmada evaluationofenamelsurfaceafterbracketdebondingandpolishing
_version_ 1756438958327201792