Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of enamel surfaces using different air-polishing powders in the orthodontic setting: an in vitro study.

PURPOSE

The aim of this in vitro study was to quantify and compare changes of the enamel surface caused by periodical use of different air-polishing powders during multibracket therapy.

METHODS

Bovine high-gloss polished enamel specimens were air-polished using an AIR-FLOW® Master Piezon with maximum powder and water settings. Each specimen was blasted with sodium bicarbonate (AIR-FLOW® Powder Classic, Electro Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) and erythritol (AIR-FLOW® Powder Plus, Electro Medical Systems). Blasting duration was adapted to the powders' cleaning efficacy and corresponded to 25 air-polishing treatments in a patient with braces. A spindle apparatus ensured uniform guidance at a distance of 4 mm and a 90° angle. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were performed with the use of low vacuum scanning electron microscopy. Following external filtering and image processing, arithmetical square height (S) and root mean square height (S) were determined.

RESULTS

Both prophy powders caused a significant increase in enamel roughness. Surfaces blasted with sodium bicarbonate (S = 64.35 ± 36.65 nm; S = 80.14 ± 44.80 nm) showed significantly (p < 0.001) higher roughness than samples treated with erythritol (S = 24.40 ± 7.42 nm; S = 30.86 ± 9.30 nm). The observed defects in enamel structure caused by sodium bicarbonate extended across prism boundaries. Prism structure remained intact after air-polishing with erythritol.

CONCLUSION

Both applied air-polishing powders led to surface alterations. Despite shorter treatment times, sodium bicarbonate was significantly more abrasive than erythritol. Clinicians must compromise between saving time and abrasively removing healthy enamel.