Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Impact of polishing system on surface roughness of different ceramic surfaces after various pretreatments and bracket debonding.
Jungbauer, Rebecca; Liebermann, Anja; Hammer, Christian M; Edelhoff, Daniel; Proff, Peter; Stawarczyk, Bogna.
Afiliação
  • Jungbauer R; Department of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany. rebecca.jungbauer@ukr.de.
  • Liebermann A; Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. rebecca.jungbauer@ukr.de.
  • Hammer CM; Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
  • Edelhoff D; Institute of Functional and Clinical Anatomy, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Proff P; Faculty of Science and Medicine, University of Fribourg, Anatomy Unit, Fribourg, Switzerland.
  • Stawarczyk B; Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig ; 27(8): 4389-4399, 2023 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37166534
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Evaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

Zirconia (ZrO2), leucite (LEU) and lithium disilicate (LiSi) specimens were pretreated with a) silica coated alumina particles (CoJet); LEU and LiSi additionally with b) hydrofluoric acid (HF), c) Monobond Etch&Prime (MEP), d) silicium carbide grinder (SiC) before bracket bonding, shearing off, ARI evaluation, excessive attachment material removal and polishing with i) Sof-Lex Discs (Soflex), ii) polishing paste (Paste), iii) polishing set (Set). Before/after polishing surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a profilometer. Martens hardness parameter were also assessed.

RESULTS:

Irrespective of pretreatment Ra of LEU increased the most, followed by LiSi and ZrO2 (p < 0.001, SiC p = 0.012), in accordance with the measured Martens hardness parameter. CoJet/SiC caused greater roughness as HF/MEP (p < 0.001). The ZrO2 surface was rougher after polishing with Paste/Set (p < 0.001; p = 0.047). Ra improved in the LEU/CoJet, LEU/SiC and LiSi/SiC groups with Soflex/Set (p < 0.001), in the LiSi/CoJet and LEU/HF groups by Soflex (p = 0.003, p < 0.001) and worsened by Paste (p = 0.017, p < 0.001). Polishing of HF or MEP pretreated LiSi with Set increased Ra (p = 0.001, p < 0.001), so did Paste in the LEU/MEP group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Paste couldn't improve the surfaces. Soflex was the only method decreasing Ra on rough surfaces and not causing roughness worsening. Polishing of LEU/LiSi after MEP, LEU after HF pretreatment doesn´t seem to have any benefit. CLINICAL RELEVANCE To avoid long-term damage to ceramic restorations, special attention should be paid to the polishing method after orthodontic treatment.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Zircônio / Cerâmica Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Zircônio / Cerâmica Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article