Methods for removal of resin remaining after debonding of orthodontic brackets: A literature review

Tonetto, Mateus Rodrigues; Frizzera, Fausto; Porto, Thiago Soares; Jordão, Keren Cristina Fagundes; Andrade, Marcelo Ferrarezi de; Santos, Reidson Stanley Soares dos; Klug, Rufino José; Bandéca, Matheus Coêlho

doi:10.4103/2348-2915.133960

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many methods were used for bracket debonding, such as manual, rotary instruments, ultrasonic, air abrasion by sandblast, and lasers [5][6][7]. Different factors, including the bur type, its rotational speed, the number of blades, and the material composition, influence the extent of the enamel damage during adhesive removal [8,9]. Tungsten Carbide system (TC) is perfect for cutting ductile materials such as composite resins.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of enamel surface integrity after orthodontic bracket debonding: comparison of three different system

Ghaleb,

Al-Worafi,

Thawaba

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study aimed to evaluate enamel surface integrity and time consumed during residual cement removal after bracket debonding using different adhesive removal burs with and without a dental loupe. Material and Methods Sixty human-extracted premolars were collected, cleaned, mounted, and prepared for orthodontic bracket bonding. Teeth were randomly divided into three main groups (n = 20) based on the adhesive removal method: tungsten carbide system (TC), sof-lex discs system (SD), and diamond system (DB) groups. Then, each group was subdivided into two subgroups (naked eye and magnifying loupe subgroups). The brackets were bonded and then debonded after 24 h, and the Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was assessed. The adhesive remnants were removed by different systems, and the final polishing was performed by Silicone OneGloss. The enamel surface roughness was evaluated before bracketing (T0), after residual cement removal (T1), and finally after polishing (T2) using surface Mitutoyo SJ-210 profilometry and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) to determine the Enamel Damage Index (EDI) score. The time consumed for adhesive removal was recorded in seconds. Results The Kruskal Wallis test showed a statistically significant difference in roughness values at T1 compared to T2 between subgroups (p < 0.001). When comparing EDI at T1 and T2, the Kruskal–Wallis H-test showed statistically significant differences in all subgroups. The pairwise comparisons revealed that EDI scores showed a statistically significant difference at T1 and T2 between DB vs. TC and SD (p = 0.015) but not between TC vs. SD (p = 1.000), indicating the highest roughness value observed in the DB group. The time for cement removal was significantly shorter in the magnifying loupe group than in the naked eye group and was shortest with the TC group, whereas the time was the longest with the DB group (p < 0.05). Conclusion All three systems were clinically satisfactory for residual orthodontic adhesive removal. However, TC system produced the lowest enamel roughness, while the DB system created the greatest. The polishing step created smoother surfaces regardless of the systems used for resin removal.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of enamel surface integrity after orthodontic bracket debonding: comparison of three different system

Ghaleb,

Al-Worafi,

Thawaba

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Thermal imaging of the pulp during residual adhesive removal

Kurt

Gul

et al. 2017

J Orofac Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effect of attachment flash on clear aligner force delivery: an in vitro study

Kiong,

Ashari,

Zamani

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The introduction of auxiliaries such as composite attachment has improved the force delivery of clear aligner (CA) therapy. However, the placement of the attachment may give rise to a flash, defined as excess resin around the attachment which may affect CA force delivery. This in vitro study aims to determine the differences in the force generated by the attachment in the presence or absence of flash in CA. Materials and methods Tristar Trubalance aligner sheets were used to fabricate the CAs. Thirty-four resin models were 3D printed and 17 each, were bonded with ellipsoidal or rectangular attachments on maxillary right central incisors. Fuji Prescale pressure film was used to measure the force generated by the attachment of CA. The images of colour density produced on the films were processed using a calibrated pressure mapping system utilising image processing techniques and topographical force mapping to quantify the force. The force measurement process was repeated after the flash was removed from the attachment using tungsten-carbide bur on a slow-speed handpiece. Results The intraclass correlation coefficient showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.92–0.98). The average mean force exerted by ellipsoidal attachments with flash was 8.05 ± 0.16 N, while 8.11 ± 0.18 N was without flash. As for rectangular attachments, the average mean force with flash was 8.48 ± 0.27 N, while 8.53 ± 0.13 N was without flash. Paired t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in the mean force exerted by CA in the presence or absence of flash for both ellipsoidal (p = 0.07) and rectangular attachments (p = 0.41). Rectangular attachments generated statistically significantly (p < 0.001) higher mean force than ellipsoidal attachments for flash and without flash. Conclusion Although rectangular attachment generated a significantly higher force than ellipsoidal attachment, the force generated by both attachments in the presence or absence of flash is similar (p > 0.05).

show abstract

Methods for removal of resin remaining after debonding of orthodontic brackets: A literature review

Cited by 6 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluation of enamel surface integrity after orthodontic bracket debonding: comparison of three different system

Evaluation of enamel surface integrity after orthodontic bracket debonding: comparison of three different system

Thermal imaging of the pulp during residual adhesive removal

Effect of attachment flash on clear aligner force delivery: an in vitro study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About