Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Department of Operative and Preventive Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Aßmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
J Orofac Orthop. 2024 Nov;85(6):404-413. doi: 10.1007/s00056-023-00466-2. Epub 2023 May 5.
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.
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.
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.
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.
本体外研究旨在定量比较和分析在多托槽矫治期间周期性使用不同喷砂粉对牙釉质表面的影响。
使用 AIR-FLOW® Master Piezon 以最大粉末和水设置对牛高光泽釉质标本进行喷砂。每个标本均使用碳酸氢钠（AIR-FLOW® Powder Classic，Electro Medical Systems，慕尼黑，德国）和赤藓糖醇（AIR-FLOW® Powder Plus，Electro Medical Systems）进行喷砂。喷砂时间根据粉末的清洁效果进行调整，相当于 25 次正畸患者的空气抛光治疗。纺锤装置以 4mm 的距离和 90°角确保均匀引导。使用低真空扫描电子显微镜进行定性和定量评估。经过外部过滤和图像处理，确定算术方均根高度（S）和均方根高度（S）。
两种预喷粉均导致牙釉质粗糙度显著增加。用碳酸氢钠喷砂的表面（S=64.35±36.65nm；S=80.14±44.80nm）比用赤藓糖醇处理的样品（S=24.40±7.42nm；S=30.86±9.30nm）粗糙度显著增加（p<0.001）。碳酸氢钠引起的牙釉质结构缺陷延伸到棱柱体边界。用赤藓糖醇进行空气抛光后，棱柱体结构保持完整。
两种应用的喷砂粉均导致表面改变。尽管处理时间较短，但碳酸氢钠的研磨性明显强于赤藓糖醇。临床医生必须在节省时间和磨损健康牙釉质之间做出妥协。
