Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips

Abstract Background The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate enamel reduction efficiency, abrasive property decay, and enamel effects between oscillating mechanical and manual systems for interproximal enamel reduction (IPR). Methods Three oscillating strips and three manual strips were...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Francesca Gazzani, Roberta Lione, Chiara Pavoni, Gianluca Mampieri, Paola Cozza
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-11-01
Series:BMC Oral Health
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0934-y
id doaj-46031f8ad52c4de393d5d7d02886b47e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-46031f8ad52c4de393d5d7d02886b47e2020-11-25T04:08:30ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312019-11-011911710.1186/s12903-019-0934-yComparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual stripsFrancesca Gazzani0Roberta Lione1Chiara Pavoni2Gianluca Mampieri3Paola Cozza4Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’Abstract Background The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate enamel reduction efficiency, abrasive property decay, and enamel effects between oscillating mechanical and manual systems for interproximal enamel reduction (IPR). Methods Three oscillating strips and three manual strips were tested on twelve freshly extracted premolars blocked in an acrylic cylinder pot by means of a material testing machine. Each strip underwent one test of 8 cycles (30 s each). Both abrasive tracks and teeth surfaces were qualitative evaluated before and after IPR by means of SEM analysis. Efficiency and abrasive property decay of both IPR systems were investigated by the amount of enamel reduction within the eight-cycle testing. Independent t-test was used to evaluate differences in variables between the two systems. Results Mechanical IPR system showed higher efficiency in terms of enamel reduction (p < 0.005) when compared with manual IPR system (0.16 mm and 0.09 mm, respectively). Quantity of removed enamel decreased throughout the 8 cycles for both systems. Less presence of enamel debris and detachment of abrasive grains were observed on mechanical strips rather than manual strips. SEM analysis revealed more regular surface of teeth undergone mechanical IPR procedures. Conclusion Oscillating diamond strips showed more controlled efficiency when compared with the manual IPR system leading to a more regular enamel surface.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0934-yInterproximal enamel reductionMechanical stripsManual stripsSEM analysis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Francesca Gazzani
Roberta Lione
Chiara Pavoni
Gianluca Mampieri
Paola Cozza
spellingShingle Francesca Gazzani
Roberta Lione
Chiara Pavoni
Gianluca Mampieri
Paola Cozza
Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
BMC Oral Health
Interproximal enamel reduction
Mechanical strips
Manual strips
SEM analysis
author_facet Francesca Gazzani
Roberta Lione
Chiara Pavoni
Gianluca Mampieri
Paola Cozza
author_sort Francesca Gazzani
title Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
title_short Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
title_full Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
title_fullStr Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
title_sort comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips
publisher BMC
series BMC Oral Health
issn 1472-6831
publishDate 2019-11-01
description Abstract Background The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate enamel reduction efficiency, abrasive property decay, and enamel effects between oscillating mechanical and manual systems for interproximal enamel reduction (IPR). Methods Three oscillating strips and three manual strips were tested on twelve freshly extracted premolars blocked in an acrylic cylinder pot by means of a material testing machine. Each strip underwent one test of 8 cycles (30 s each). Both abrasive tracks and teeth surfaces were qualitative evaluated before and after IPR by means of SEM analysis. Efficiency and abrasive property decay of both IPR systems were investigated by the amount of enamel reduction within the eight-cycle testing. Independent t-test was used to evaluate differences in variables between the two systems. Results Mechanical IPR system showed higher efficiency in terms of enamel reduction (p < 0.005) when compared with manual IPR system (0.16 mm and 0.09 mm, respectively). Quantity of removed enamel decreased throughout the 8 cycles for both systems. Less presence of enamel debris and detachment of abrasive grains were observed on mechanical strips rather than manual strips. SEM analysis revealed more regular surface of teeth undergone mechanical IPR procedures. Conclusion Oscillating diamond strips showed more controlled efficiency when compared with the manual IPR system leading to a more regular enamel surface.
topic Interproximal enamel reduction
Mechanical strips
Manual strips
SEM analysis
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0934-y
work_keys_str_mv AT francescagazzani comparisonoftheabrasivepropertiesoftwodifferentsystemsforinterproximalenamelreductionoscillatingversusmanualstrips
AT robertalione comparisonoftheabrasivepropertiesoftwodifferentsystemsforinterproximalenamelreductionoscillatingversusmanualstrips
AT chiarapavoni comparisonoftheabrasivepropertiesoftwodifferentsystemsforinterproximalenamelreductionoscillatingversusmanualstrips
AT gianlucamampieri comparisonoftheabrasivepropertiesoftwodifferentsystemsforinterproximalenamelreductionoscillatingversusmanualstrips
AT paolacozza comparisonoftheabrasivepropertiesoftwodifferentsystemsforinterproximalenamelreductionoscillatingversusmanualstrips
_version_ 1724425431890788352