Křivková Tereza, Tichý Antonín, Tycová Hana, Kučera Josef
Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Kateřinská 32, 121 11 Prague, Czech Republic.
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacký University Olomouc, Palackého 700/12, 779 00 Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Materials (Basel). 2023 Jul 20;16(14):5107. doi: 10.3390/ma16145107.
A slight alteration of the enamel surface is inevitable upon debonding of orthodontic brackets, adhesive removal, and finishing/polishing. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare two adhesives and three polishing methods by measuring enamel surface roughness using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Brackets were bonded on 42 extracted human premolars using Transbond XT (Transbond group) or Fuji Ortho (Fuji group). After debracketing, adhesives were removed with a tungsten carbide bur, and surfaces were polished using Sof-Lex discs, a rotary brush with a prophylactic paste (Depural), or a prophylactic cup with two polishing pastes (n = 7 in each subgroup). Surface roughness (S, S, S, and S) was measured using CLSM and compared before treatment (T), after debracketing and adhesive removal (T), and after polishing (T). The data were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni correction. The time required for adhesive removal was measured and compared using a two-sample t-test. Surface roughness at T increased compared to T, but the difference was significant only for the Fuji group ( < 0.01). The time required to remove Transbond XT (94.1 ± 6.8 s) was significantly higher compared to Fuji (72.1 ± 5.9 s, < 0.0001). Polishing with Sof-Lex discs resulted in lower surface roughness compared to T ( = 0.018). Using Depural and polishing pastes showed no significant difference in surface roughness compared to T, except for a significant decrease in S and S for Transbond ( = 0.043) and in S for Fuji ( = 0.018) after polishing with Depural. In conclusion, the removal of Transbond took significantly longer, but there were fewer residues of composite resin on the enamel surface. Sof-Lex discs decreased enamel roughness, whereas enamel morphology and roughness were similar to the pre-treatment state after polishing with polishing pastes.
在正畸托槽脱粘、去除粘结剂以及进行修整/抛光时，牙釉质表面会不可避免地发生轻微改变。本体外研究的目的是通过使用共聚焦激光扫描显微镜（CLSM）测量牙釉质表面粗糙度，比较两种粘结剂和三种抛光方法。使用Transbond XT（Transbond组）或Fuji Ortho（Fuji组）将托槽粘结在42颗拔除的人类前磨牙上。脱槽后，用碳化钨车针去除粘结剂，然后使用Sof-Lex盘、带有预防性糊剂的旋转刷（Depural）或带有两种抛光糊剂的预防性杯对表面进行抛光（每个亚组n = 7）。使用CLSM测量表面粗糙度（S、S、S和S），并在治疗前（T）、脱槽和去除粘结剂后（T）以及抛光后（T）进行比较。使用Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验并进行Bonferroni校正对数据进行统计学分析。测量去除粘结剂所需的时间，并使用两样本t检验进行比较。与T相比，T时的表面粗糙度增加，但仅Fuji组差异具有统计学意义（<0.01）。去除Transbond XT所需的时间（94.1±6.8秒）明显高于Fuji组（72.1±5.9秒，<0.0001）。与T相比，使用Sof-Lex盘抛光导致表面粗糙度更低（=0.018）。使用Depural和抛光糊剂在表面粗糙度方面与T相比无显著差异，除了使用Depural抛光后，Transbond组的S和S显著降低（=0.043），Fuji组的S显著降低（=0.018）。总之，去除Transbond所需时间明显更长，但牙釉质表面的复合树脂残留较少。Sof-Lex盘降低了牙釉质粗糙度，而使用抛光糊剂抛光后牙釉质形态和粗糙度与治疗前状态相似。
