The Effect of Various Debonding Burs on the Enamel Surfaces of Teeth After Debonding Metal Brackets
Nouri Mahdavie, Niloufar
MetadataShow full item record
The debonding stage of orthodontic treatment involves removal of attachments from the surface of teeth followed by removal of remaining adhesive resin. The adhesive resin removal process is often accomplished by different debonding burs which are believed to be safe to enamel surface while removing all remaining adhesive resin from the tooth surface. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of four different commercially available burs on the enamel surface of teeth. The four burs studied were: 1) 12 fluted (universal) carbide, 2) 20 fluted carbide, 3) 30 fluted carbide, and 4) white stone. Eighty human premolar teeth were randomly assigned to one of four groups. In each group, fifteen teeth were used for profilometric analysis and the remaining five teeth were used for scanning electron microscopy. Initial profilometric analysis and SEM imaging were performed. After the teeth were bonded using metal brackets, brackets were removed from the surface of teeth using bracket removing pliers. The amount of remaining adhesive on the surface of teeth was evaluated using the ARI system. The remaining adhesive was removed with one of the four burs according to the group. Final profilometric analysis and final SEM imaging were performed. The results of the study showed that there was a statistically significant difference in roughness value after debonding between groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.000), 1 and 3(p = 0.000), 1 and 4 (p = 0.000), 2 and 4 (p = 0.000), and 3 and 4 (p= 0.000). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between groups 2 and 3 (p= 0.063). The ARI values between groups were comparable and no statistically significant differences were observed between groups in terms of amount of adhesive resin remaining on the tooth surface prior to using the debonding burs(p=0.925). Overall, the white stone bur caused the most damage to the surface of enamel, followed by the 12 fluted bur while the 30 fluted and 20 fluted carbide burs caused the least damage. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in enamel surface roughness between the 20 fluted and the 30 fluted burs.
Subjectenamel surface roughness
scanning electron microscopy