Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems

This study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket...

وصف كامل

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
الحاوية / القاعدة:Diagnostics
المؤلفون الرئيسيون: Abdullazez Almudhi, Arwa Aldeeri, Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Aloraini, Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alomar, Meshari Saad M. Alqudairi, Osama Abdullah A. Alzahrani, Elzahraa Eldwakhly, Sarah AlMugairin
التنسيق: مقال
اللغة:الإنجليزية
منشور في: MDPI AG 2023-10-01
الموضوعات:
الوصول للمادة أونلاين:https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/20/3284
_version_ 1849881591495524352
author Abdullazez Almudhi
Arwa Aldeeri
Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Aloraini
Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alomar
Meshari Saad M. Alqudairi
Osama Abdullah A. Alzahrani
Elzahraa Eldwakhly
Sarah AlMugairin
author_facet Abdullazez Almudhi
Arwa Aldeeri
Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Aloraini
Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alomar
Meshari Saad M. Alqudairi
Osama Abdullah A. Alzahrani
Elzahraa Eldwakhly
Sarah AlMugairin
author_sort Abdullazez Almudhi
collection DOAJ
container_title Diagnostics
description This study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket bonding. Brackets were then debonded using bracket-removing pliers. Teeth were randomly assigned to seven groups based on the residual cement removal system: Group 1: Stainbuster bur, Group 2: Renew diamond bur #129, Group 3: Renew carbide bur, Group 4: OneGloss Complete system, Group 5: Sof-Lex system, Group 6: Enhance Finishing and PoGo Polishing complete kit, and Group 7: Renew friction grip points. The enamel surface was evaluated for roughness before bracketing and after residual cement removal using surface profilometry. The time taken for cement removal was recorded using a digital timer, and heat generation was measured using a laser thermometer before and after cement removal. One-way ANOVA compared the pre- and post-values for enamel surface roughness, temperature, and time consumed. When comparing the difference between the post- and pre-finishing roughness using one-way ANOVA, the Renew diamond bur produced the roughest enamel surface post-removal with a mean of 4.716 μm, while the Sof-Lex recorded the lowest at 0.760 μm. The highest mean temperature was recorded with the Stainbuster bur at 5.545 °C, and the lowest temperature was recorded with the Enhance bur at 2.260 °C. The time for cement removal was the shortest with the Enhance bur at 12.2 s, whereas the time was the longest with the Renew diamond bur at 30.4 s. In conclusion, all the residual cement removal systems used in this clinically simulated study were not able to restore the original enamel surface smoothness. However, the 3M Sof-Lex produced the lowest enamel roughness but with more time consumption and heat generation. When selecting the best residual cement removal system to be used, clinicians should weigh the merits and demerits of each system based on the clinical judgement of the operator.
format Article
id doaj-art-b708cd7cae2247bfb23a98ca9fd08012
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 2075-4418
language English
publishDate 2023-10-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
spelling doaj-art-b708cd7cae2247bfb23a98ca9fd080122025-08-20T01:08:58ZengMDPI AGDiagnostics2075-44182023-10-011320328410.3390/diagnostics13203284Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal SystemsAbdullazez Almudhi0Arwa Aldeeri1Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Aloraini2Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alomar3Meshari Saad M. Alqudairi4Osama Abdullah A. Alzahrani5Elzahraa Eldwakhly6Sarah AlMugairin7Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaCollege of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi ArabiaDepartment of Clinical Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh 11671, Saudi ArabiaDepartment of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh 11671, Saudi ArabiaThis study used seven different adhesive removal systems to evaluate and compare enamel surface integrity, heat generation, and time consumed during residual cement removal after de-bracketing. The sample size was 140 human premolars. Teeth were cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket bonding. Brackets were then debonded using bracket-removing pliers. Teeth were randomly assigned to seven groups based on the residual cement removal system: Group 1: Stainbuster bur, Group 2: Renew diamond bur #129, Group 3: Renew carbide bur, Group 4: OneGloss Complete system, Group 5: Sof-Lex system, Group 6: Enhance Finishing and PoGo Polishing complete kit, and Group 7: Renew friction grip points. The enamel surface was evaluated for roughness before bracketing and after residual cement removal using surface profilometry. The time taken for cement removal was recorded using a digital timer, and heat generation was measured using a laser thermometer before and after cement removal. One-way ANOVA compared the pre- and post-values for enamel surface roughness, temperature, and time consumed. When comparing the difference between the post- and pre-finishing roughness using one-way ANOVA, the Renew diamond bur produced the roughest enamel surface post-removal with a mean of 4.716 μm, while the Sof-Lex recorded the lowest at 0.760 μm. The highest mean temperature was recorded with the Stainbuster bur at 5.545 °C, and the lowest temperature was recorded with the Enhance bur at 2.260 °C. The time for cement removal was the shortest with the Enhance bur at 12.2 s, whereas the time was the longest with the Renew diamond bur at 30.4 s. In conclusion, all the residual cement removal systems used in this clinically simulated study were not able to restore the original enamel surface smoothness. However, the 3M Sof-Lex produced the lowest enamel roughness but with more time consumption and heat generation. When selecting the best residual cement removal system to be used, clinicians should weigh the merits and demerits of each system based on the clinical judgement of the operator.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/20/3284orthodontic adhesiveorthodontic bracketsdental enamelSEMdental debonding
spellingShingle Abdullazez Almudhi
Arwa Aldeeri
Abdullah Abdulrahman A. Aloraini
Ahmed Ibrahim M. Alomar
Meshari Saad M. Alqudairi
Osama Abdullah A. Alzahrani
Elzahraa Eldwakhly
Sarah AlMugairin
Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
orthodontic adhesive
orthodontic brackets
dental enamel
SEM
dental debonding
title Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_full Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_fullStr Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_short Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems
title_sort comparison of enamel surface integrity after de bracketing as affected by seven different orthodontic residual cement removal systems
topic orthodontic adhesive
orthodontic brackets
dental enamel
SEM
dental debonding
url https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/20/3284
work_keys_str_mv AT abdullazezalmudhi comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT arwaaldeeri comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT abdullahabdulrahmanaaloraini comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT ahmedibrahimmalomar comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT mesharisaadmalqudairi comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT osamaabdullahaalzahrani comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT elzahraaeldwakhly comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems
AT sarahalmugairin comparisonofenamelsurfaceintegrityafterdebracketingasaffectedbysevendifferentorthodonticresidualcementremovalsystems