| Published Version Download ( PDF | 1MB) | License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 |
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
and Stawarczyk, Bogna
(2023)
Impact of polishing system on surface roughness of different ceramic surfaces after various pretreatments and bracket debonding.
Clinical Oral Investigations 27, pp. 4389-4399.
Date of publication of this fulltext: 23 May 2023 05:01
Article
DOI to cite this document: 10.5283/epub.54255
Abstract
ObjectiveEvaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments.Material and methodsZirconia (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) ...
ObjectiveEvaluating various polishing methods after bracket debonding and excessive attachment material removal for different ceramics and pretreatments.Material and methodsZirconia (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.ResultsIrrespective 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).ConclusionsPaste 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.
Alternative links to fulltext
Involved Institutions
Details
| Item type | Article | ||||
| Journal or Publication Title | Clinical Oral Investigations | ||||
| Publisher: | SPRINGER HEIDELBERG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open Access Type: | DEAL (Springer) | ||||
| Place of Publication: | HEIDELBERG | ||||
| Volume: | 27 | ||||
| Page Range: | pp. 4389-4399 | ||||
| Date | 11 May 2023 | ||||
| Institutions | Medicine > Lehrstuhl für Kieferorthopädie | ||||
| Identification Number |
| ||||
| Keywords | TENSILE BOND STRENGTH; GLOSS; Surface roughness; Pretreatment; Bracket debonding; Polishing; Ceramics | ||||
| Dewey Decimal Classification | 600 Technology > 610 Medical sciences Medicine | ||||
| Status | Published | ||||
| Refereed | Yes, this version has been refereed | ||||
| Created at the University of Regensburg | Partially | ||||
| URN of the UB Regensburg | urn:nbn:de:bvb:355-epub-542552 | ||||
| Item ID | 54255 |
Download Statistics
Download Statistics