Article Data

  • Views 658
  • Dowloads 180

Original Research

Open Access

The effect of freezing on the fracture pattern of adhesive on debonding: an in-vitro study

  • Nadija Murati1
  • Iosif Sifakakis2
  • Theodore Eliades1,*,

1Clinic of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland

2Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 115 27 Athens, Greece

DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2024.056 Vol.48,Issue 3,May 2024 pp.31-36

Submitted: 06 December 2023 Accepted: 23 January 2024

Published: 03 May 2024

*Corresponding Author(s): Theodore Eliades E-mail: theodore-eliades@zzm.uzh.ch

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to quantitatively evaluate adhesive remnants on the enamel surface following bracket debonding using a freezing element. Thirty-six sound premolars were used in this study. In each case, a bracket was bonded onto each tooth with conventional light-cured composite resin and de-bonded after one week. Freezing of the underlying composite through the bracket was performed immediately before debonding with a portable cryosurgical system (−55 C). Specimens were divided into three groups according to the duration of freezing: a control group without freezing was used as a reference and two interventional groups with different durations of freezing (15 or 40 s). Brackets were removed by using debonding pliers to squeeze the wings of the bracket in an occluso-gingival manner. Adhesive remnants on the tooth were then quantitatively evaluated by stereo-microscopy. Pearson’s Chi-squared test was used to investigate the relationship between the proportion of remaining resin and the group of teeth. In the control group, 100% of the composite remained on the enamel surface of all specimens. Significantly less adhesive remnants were found in the intervention groups (p = 0.001 for the 15 s group and p = 0.043 for the 40 s group). There was no significant difference between the two interventions (p = 0.165) in terms of the proportion of remaining adhesive remnants. Freezing of the bracket and the underlying adhesive resin prior to bracket debonding may favorably alter the behavioral pattern of composite fracture, thus reducing the extent of adhesive remnants on the enamel. Increasing the freezing time from 15 to 40 s did not exert significant effects on adhesive remnants following debonding. Further research now needs to investigate the effect of freezing on the mechanical properties of the adhesive remnants and its in-vivo effect on pulp vitality over both short- and long-terms.


Keywords

Adhesive remnants; Debonding; Freezing


Cite and Share

Nadija Murati,Iosif Sifakakis,Theodore Eliades. The effect of freezing on the fracture pattern of adhesive on debonding: an in-vitro study. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2024. 48(3);31-36.

References

[1] Brantley WA, Eliades T. Orthodontic materials: scientific and clinical aspects. 1st edn. Thieme: Stuttgart. 2011.

[2] Piccoli L, Migliau G, Besharat LK, Di Carlo S, Pompa G, Di Giorgio R. Comparison of two different debonding techniques in orthodontic treatment. Annali Di Stomatologia. 2017; 8: 71–78.

[3] Tsuruoka T, Namura Y, Shimizu N. Development of an easy-debonding orthodontic adhesive using thermal heating. Dental Materials Journal. 2007; 26: 78–83.

[4] Kumar P, Garg R, Dixit P, Khosla T, Gupta P, Kalra H. Enamel surface roughness after debonding: a comparative study using three different burs. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2018; 19: 521–526.

[5] Ryu C, Namura Y, Tsuruoka T, Hama T, Kaji K, Shimizu N. The use of easily debondable orthodontic adhesives with ceramic brackets. Dental Materials Journal. 2011; 30: 642–647.

[6] Kameda T, Ohkuma K, Terada K. Rapid bonding and easy debonding of orthodontic appliances with 4-META/MMA-TBB resin using thermal heating. Dental Materials Journal. 2014; 33: 818–827.

[7] Eliades T, Kakaboura A, Eliades G, Bradley TG. Comparison of enamel colour changes associated with orthodontic bonding using two different adhesives. The European Journal of Orthodontics. 2001; 23: 85–90.

[8] Moolya N, Shetty A, Gupta N, Gupta A, Jalan V, Sharma R. Orthodontic bracket designs and their impact on microbial profile and periodontal disease: a clinical trial. Journal of Orthodontic Science. 2014; 3: 125–131.

[9] Faria-Júnior M, Guiraldo RD, Berger SB, Correr AB, Correr-Sobrinho L, Contreras EF, et al. In-vivo evaluation of the surface roughness and morphology of enamel after bracket removal and polishing by different techniques. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2015; 147: 324–329.

[10] Janiszewska-Olszowska J, Szatkiewicz T, Tomkowski R, Tandecka K, Grocholewicz K. Effect of orthodontic debonding and adhesive removal on the enamel—current knowledge and future perspectives—a systematic review. Medical Science Monitor. 2014; 20: 1991–2001.

[11] Sifakakis I, Zinelis S, Eliades G, Koletsi D, Eliades T. Enamel gloss changes induced by orthodontic bonding. Journal of Orthodontics. 2018; 45: 269–274.

[12] Gibas-Stanek M, Pihut M. Safe debonding of fixed appliances: a comparison of traditional techniques and LODI devices on different bracket types in terms of enamel cracks, site of bond failure, and bracket reusability. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18: 10267.

[13] Zarrinnia K, Eid NM, Kehoe MJ. The effect of different debonding techniques on the enamel surface: an in vitro qualitative study. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1995; 108: 284–293.

[14] Scribante A, Sfondrini M, Fraticelli D, Roncallo S, Gandini P. Epidemiological survey of different clinical techniques of orthodontic bracket debonding and enamel polishing. Journal of Orthodontic Science. 2015; 4: 123–127.

[15] Dutta PK, Hui D. Low-temperature and freeze-thaw durability of thick composites. Composites Part B: Engineering. 1996; 27: 371–379.

[16] Twisk JWR. Sample size calculations. In Twisk JWR (ed.) Applied mixed model analysis, a practical guide. (pp. 179–186). 1st edn. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA. 2019.

[17] Montasser MA, Drummond JL. Reliability of the adhesive remnant index score system with different magnifications. The Angle Orthodontist. 2009; 79: 773–776.

[18] Bora N, Mahanta P, Konwar R, Basumatari B, Phukan C, Kalita D, et al. Evaluation of time consumption for debonding brackets using different techniques: a hospital-based study. Journal of Healthcare Engineering. 2021; 2021: 5567863.

[19] Kichhannagari S. Effects of extreme low temperature on composite materials. University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 2004; 165.

[20] Pont HB, Özcan M, Bagis B, Ren Y. Loss of surface enamel after bracket debonding: an in-vivo and ex-vivo evaluation. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2010; 138: 387.e1–387.e9.

[21] Takla PM, Shivapuja PK. Pulpal response in electrothermal debonding. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1995; 108: 623–629.

[22] Dovgan JS, Walton RE, Bishara SE. Electrothermal debracketing: patient acceptance and effects on the dental pulp. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1995; 108: 249–255.

[23] Abd-Elmeguid A, Yu DC. Dental pulp neurophysiology: part 1. Clinical and diagnostic implications. Journal of the Canadian Dental Association. 2009; 75: 55–59.

[24] Tokuda M, Tatsuyama S, Fujisawa M, Morimoto-Yamashita Y, Kawakami Y, Shibukawa Y, et al. Dentin and pulp sense cold stimulus. Medical Hypotheses. 2015; 84: 442–444.

[25] Zach L, Cohen G. Pulp response to externally applied heat. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1965; 19: 515–530.

[26] Lin M, Luo ZY, Bai F, Xu F, Lu TJ. Fluid mechanics in dentinal microtubules provides mechanistic insights into the difference between hot and cold dental pain. PLOS ONE. 2011; 23: e18068.

[27] Nalbantgil D, Tozlu M, Oztoprak MO. Pulpal thermal changes following Er-YAG laser debonding of ceramic brackets. The Scientific World Journal. 2014; 2014: 912429.

[28] Ghazanfari R, Azimi N, Nokhbatolfoghahaie H, Alikhasi M. Laser aided ceramic restoration removal: a comprehensive review. Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences. 2019; 10: 86–91.

[29] Cardoso LA, Valdrighi HC, Vedovello Filho M, Correr AB. Effect of adhesive remnant removal on enamel topography after bracket debonding. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics. 2014; 19: 105–112.

[30] Ireland AJ, Hosein I, Sherriff M. Enamel loss at bond-up, debond and clean-up following the use of a conventional light-cured composite and a resin-modified glass polyalkenoate cement. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2005; 27: 413–419.

[31] Cramer NB, Stansbury JW, Bowman CN. Recent advances and developments in composite dental restorative materials. Journal of Dental Research. 2011; 90: 402–416.

[32] Pazinatto FB, Campos BB, Costa LC, Atta MT. Effect of the number of thermocycles on microleakage of resin composite restorations. Pesquisa Odontológica Brasileira. 2003; 17: 337–341.

[33] Weir MD, Moreau JL, Levine ED, Strassler HE, Chow LC, Xu HH. Nanocomposite containing CaF2 nanoparticles: thermal cycling, wear and long-term water-aging. Dental Materials. 2012; 28: 642–652.



Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top