Debonding Techniques Research Articles

3-Dimensional topographic enamel surface changes after different debonding techniques for aligner attachments: a micro-CT study

IntroductionTo evaluate topographic changes of enamel surface in 3-dimensional after different debonding methods of aligner attachments formed with 2 different composite resins.MethodsVertical rectangular attachments were created on 88 premolar teeth and divided into two composite resin groups (Group 1:flowable, Group 2:packable) (N = 44). These were then divided into two subgroups (N = 22) using different debonding methods. In Group A, the attachments were firstly removed using an attachment debonding plier and then with white fiberglass. Following, the tooth surfaces were polished with blue fiberglass. In Group B, the excess attachment composite was removed with a 12-blade carbide bur, followed by a 24-blade carbide bur, and tooth surfaces were polished with Renew stone. The remaining composite volume was measured using Geomagic Control X software. Enamel surface roughness and morphological change were compared between the groups.ResultsResidual composite resin volume did not show a statistically significant difference between composite resin groups (1–2 A). The enamel demineralization volume and area changes in Group 2 A were significantly higher than observed in 2B (p < 0.05). Roughness parameters Ra (T1-T0), Ra (T2-T0), Rq (T1-T0), and Sa (T1-T0) were significantly higher in Group 1B compared to Group 1 A (p < 0.05). Similarly, Ra (T1-T0), Sa (T1-T0), and Sq (T1-T0) parameters were significantly higher in Group 2B compared to Group 2 A (p < 0.05).ConclusionsFiberglass with a debonding plier produced a smoother enamel surface compared to carbide burs, but caused significantly more enamel demineralization, as seen in micro-CT evaluations after polishing.

Microwave-based removal of polyurethane and epoxy floor coatings

A new debonding technique based on microwave stimulation is being investigated in epoxy and polyurethane floor coatings by combining specific microwave absorbers with temperature-induced blowing agents. Current methods, including mechanical processes such as grinding, typically produce materials with multiple fractions, impeding recycling and the establishment of a circular economy. The microwave method facilitates mono-fraction materials and enhances accessibility to commonly used recycling techniques, particularly in solvolytic processes such as polyurethane recycling. Consequently, a standard two-layer coating system is used, consisting of an epoxy primer and a polyurethane overlay. Various microwave absorbers, such as carbon black and carbon fibres, as well as blowing agents based on thermally expanding particles are investigated. The influence of the additives on the thermo-mechanical properties is studied to identify suitable combinations. The modified materials are later evaluated for their mechanical properties. Two microwave antennas, operating at a frequency of 2.45 GHz and power of 1 kW, are used and compared to activate the modified coating systems. The technology has been successfully integrated into the formulation to allow mono-fraction recovery of the materials. No significant negative effects on material quality were observed. However, due to the extended processing time required for the debonding, further optimisation is necessary. Nevertheless, the feasibility of utilising a laboratory-based microwave approach has been substantiated.

Effect of Different Chemical Solvents on Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets: An In Vitro Study.

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the impact of various chemical solvents on bond strength of orthodontic brackets. One hundred healthy human premolars with undamaged buccal surfaces that were extracted for orthodontic purposes were gathered. Using 37% orthophosphoric acid, primer, and Transbond XT adhesive, ceramic 0.018" × 0.022" slot orthodontic brackets were adhered to the tooth surface. Following thermocycling, all samples were divided into four groups, with 25 samples in each group: group I: control; group II: application of ethanol; group III: application of acetone; and group IV: application of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). Following the debonding tests, a double-ocular stereomicroscope was used to inspect the tooth surfaces. Additionally, adhesive remnant index (ARI) values were evaluated at 40× magnification. Data were recorded and statistically analyzed. The bond strength was lesser in acetone applied group (16.18 ± 3.64) followed by DMSO applied group (22.08 ± 2.86), ethanol applied group (24.36 ± 4.02), and control group (27.14 ± 3.68). There was a highly significant difference found between the chemical solvents group. The ARI score 3 was present in control (12%), ethanol (8%), and DMSO (4%), and it was absent in acetone applied group. The ARI score 0 was more in acetone applied group (24%). The present study concluded that the reduced debonding force was found with the application of acetone solvent followed by DMSO, ethanol, and control groups. Applying acetone can be a substitute technique to help with ceramic bracket debonding. Orthodontic bracket debonding cannot occur without shear bond strength (SBS). The need for an ideal debonding technique for ceramic brackets without negative consequences arises from the risk of enamel damage that frequently follows the process. Acetone treatment prior to ceramic bracket debonding could be an alternate clinical technique to preventing enamel damage and facilitating debonding. How to cite this article: Bhushan R, Singh S, Sam G, et al. Effect of Different Chemical Solvents on Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023;24(12):940-943.

Laser Er:YAG-Assisted Debonding May Be a Viable Alternative to the Conventional Method for Monocrystalline Ceramic Brackets.

In orthodontic practice, due to the increased interest among patients in smile aesthetics, different types of brackets are now being used, with those most frequently applied being ones made of polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the laser Er:YAG-assisted debonding technique compared to conventional methods for removing monocrystalline ceramic brackets from human teeth. The study sample included 60 vital teeth (frontals of the upper jaw) from 10 patients who had monocrystalline ceramic brackets and were in the final phase of orthodontic treatment. The debonding procedure was carried out following a split-mouth study design, using either the conventional technique or laser Er:YAG 2940 nm radiation. For each tooth, three variables were evaluated: the patient's sujective tooth sensitivity associated with the debonding, the time required for debonding, and pulp blood flow microdynamics after the debonding. Three evaluation instruments were used to assess and quantify the treatment effects: (i) the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale for pain assessment; (ii) a digital stopwatch/timer to measure the time required to remove the bracket; and (iii) laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) for recording the pulp blood flow evolution. The statistical analysis of the recorded data showed a statistically significant difference between the two debonding methods regarding the tooth sensitivity during the debonding and the time required for the procedure. The subjective tooth sensitivity was reduced from a mean ± standard deviation of 3.07 ± 1.46 to 0.47 ± 0.86 on the Wong-Baker FACES scale (Wilcoxon signed rank, p &lt; 0.001). The necessary time for debonding was reduced by 0.697 ± 0.703 s per tooth (paired t-test, p &lt; 0.001). There was no difference in the blood microdynamics between the two debonding techniques. According to the results of this study, the laser Er:YAG-assisted debonding technique may be a viable alternative to the conventional method for monocrystalline ceramic brackets.

Optical coherence tomography assessment of the enamel surface after debonding the ceramic brackets using three different techniques.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the enamel surface damage and residual adhesive remnant [adhesive remnant index (ARI)] on extracted premolars after debonding the ceramic brackets using three different debonding techniques, with optical coherence tomography (OCT).METHODS:Ninety extracted premolars were bonded with ceramic brackets and divided into three groups of 30 teeth each based on debonding techniques used. Twenty-four hours later, they were debonded using three different debonding techniques: debonding pliers, ultrasonic scalers, and Er-YAG laser. A baseline scan was obtained prior to bonding using OCT. The teeth were evaluated for the adhesive remnant on the tooth surface using ARI score, and the amount of enamel surface damage was evaluated using OCT.RESULTS:We observed that the use of ultrasonic scalers as a debonding technique led to greater incidence of enamel surface damage as measured in OCT. The ARI scores with debonding pliers and laser were significantly greater than that of scaler debonding.CONCLUSIONS:Results of this in vitro study confirmed that use of ultrasonic scalers as a debonding technique led to significantly greater incidence of enamel surface damage when compared to the other two debonding techniques. The ARI scores on the tooth surface using debonding pliers and laser were significantly greater than that of the scaler debonding technique.

Bracket Removal and Enamel Polishing Procedures After Completion of Orthodontic Treatment; A Survey Among Iraqi Orthodontists

Objective: To survey the orthodontic debonding techniques in Iraq and describe the most commonly used methods to remove the brackets and adhesive remnants from the enamel surfaces. &#x0D; Methods: A questionnaire survey consisting of 9 questions about general information of the participants (gender, work location, duration of practicing orthodontics), bracket debonding methods, and instruments used was electronically sent to Iraqi orthodontists. &#x0D; Results: Overall, 91 orthodontists responded. 67% of participants found enamel damage after bracket removal. The most commonly used pliers for bracket debonding were bracket removal pliers (73.6%) and ligature cutters (23.1%). For adhesive removal, high-speed tungsten carbide burs were the most widely used technique for adhesive removal, followed by low-speed carbide burs and low-speed abrasive discs, respectively. The most frequently used instruments for polishing after debonding were rubber cups with pumice (40.65%). &#x0D; Conclusions: In the present survey, it is shown that bracket debonding pliers are the most commonly used pliers for bracket removal. High-speed tungsten carbide bur is the most utilized method for adhesive removal, rubber cup together with pumice is the most commonly used technique for tooth polishing.

Use of optical coherence tomography in orthodontics.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a modern imaging method with applicability in orthodontics. In recent years, there has been an increasing trend in the use of ceramic brackets. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of bonding metallic and ceramic brackets on tooth enamel, using optical coherence tomography. For this purpose, 20 permanent teeth we bonded and were subsequently debonded using a side cutter or anterior bracket removal pliers. Using the OCT technique, the enamel, the amount of adhesive remaining and the bracket fragments remaining on the tooth surface were analyzed following the debonding procedure. It was demonstrated that enamel cracks were present only in the samples bonded with ceramic brackets. At the same time, it was noted that the type of pliers did not affect the incidence and extent of damage to the enamel. The type of debonding technique (using the side cutter or the anterior removal pliers) used did not markedly affect the amount of adhesive remaining on the teeth. Thus, as demonstrated herein, by analyzing the enamel structure through the use of OCT, the quality of the processes and the materials used for manufacturing brackets can be increased.

English

BACKGROUND The overall success of orthodontic treatment depends on both bonding as well as debonding techniques. The debonding procedure in orthodontics consists of removal of the attachments (brackets, bondable tubes &amp; buttons) as well as all the adhesive resin from the teeth without causing any permanent damage and to restore the teeth to their pre-treatment stage. The demand for more aesthetic appliance led to the introduction of direct bonding techniques and has made banded attachments almost obsolete in present-day orthodontics. These procedures should not be painful to the patient or damaging to enamel and to obtain these objectives a correct debonding technique is of fundamental importance. The debonding procedure is as essential as bonding for the overall success of the orthodontic treatment. In an attempt to increase the bond strength of orthodontic appliances, we have neglected the fact that these appliances have to be debonded at the end of the treatment. In orthodontics debonding refers to debracketing that is removal of brackets, bondable tubes, buttons, and the adhesive used to bond as well as to restore the form and surface of tooth to its best possible original form by avoiding any type of iatrogenic damage. For achieving such objectives, an accurate debonding procedure is of utmost importance, else it could be needlessly lengthy and painful to the patient and damaging to the enamel. Many researches have been carried out to conclude the best techniques for debonding which will give an ideal finish for the tooth when treatment is terminated. The debonding procedure is mostly done by mechanical means, but its technique should be varied according to the bracket material and type. KEY WORDS Debonding Techniques, Metal Brackets, Ceramic Brackets, Enamel Damage

The Effect of Erbium-Doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser in Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Objective: The purpose of this review is to systematically assess the existing literature and summarize the evidence regarding the effect of erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser on enamel surface roughness and pulp health compared with the conventional orthodontic debonding techniques. Materials and methods: Following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement, the electronic database, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google scholar, and Saudi Digital Library were searched for relevant published records. Data were collected following specific keywords: "debonding" "Er:YAG laser" etc. In vitro studies, and clinical randomized- and nonrandomized-controlled studies limited to the English language and published in peer-reviewed journals were included. Results: A total of 564 articles were identified as relevant to the topic. Duplicates were excluded resulting in 382 articles, out of which 374 articles were discarded upon screening titles and abstracts. The remaining eight articles were read to their entirety and included in the current qualitative review after fulfilling the eligibility criteria. In all the included studies, a total of 480 sound posterior teeth were used to evaluate the effect of Er:YAG laser on debonding of orthodontic brackets from the enamel surface. Conclusions: Er:YAG laser debonding has demonstrated a reduced risk of enamel damage (fracture or cracks) but resulted in increased enamel surface roughness and was time-consuming for adhesive removal procedures compared with the conventional debonding methods. Further, within the applied laser settings, Er:YAG lasers have found to exhibit low thermal exhaustion in relation to the pulp. The laser source with a wavelength of 2940 nm has been used with different setting ranges (power of 2.5-5 W, energy 125-600 mJ, frequency 4-30 Hz, and pulse duration 50-350 μsec) for debonding of orthodontic brackets.

Debonding of Orthodontic Ceramic brackets: A comprehensive review of the literature – Part 1

The purpose of this 2 part literature review is to evaluate various debonding techniques for orthodontic ceramic bracket removal and their clinical applications.In part 1, and studies on mechanical and ultrasonic debonding techniques have been reviewed. Mechanical debonding (use of diamond burs, special pliers) is most widely applicable in clinical practice. Use of recommended pliers by manufacturers is key to minimize bracket failure modes as these pliers are designed specifically for the brackets. Ultrasonic debonding is advantageous in minimizing bracket failure but requires greater time to debond ceramic brackets than mechanical debonding and it may be uncomfortable to the patient due to longer duration of use. Studies on electrothermal and Laser debonding have been reviewed in part 2 of the literature review.

Debonding of Orthodontic Ceramic brackets: A comprehensive review of the literature – Part 2

The purpose of this 2 part review is to evaluate various debonding techniques for orthodontic ceramic bracket removal and their clinical applications.In this part 2 of the literature review, and studies on electrothermal debonding and Laser debonding techniques have been reviewed. Electrothermal debonding is a physiologically acceptable alternative to mechanical debonding. It requires minimal force following thermal softening of adhesive material and produces minimal changes to enamel surfaces compared to conventional methods. Minimal effects on enamel and intrapulpal temperature changes are noted with ytterbium fiber laser, diode laser and Tm:YAP laser. Different parameters are possible with CO laser, Nd:YAG laser and Er:YAG laser that may need further research before considering them in clinical practice.

Thermo-mechanical debonding map for repairing composite–metal adhesive joints

Adhesive bonding is one of the dominant joining technologies in Design for Assembly to obtain innovative engineering products with complex geometries. These permanently bonded joints could be disassembled for repair purposes using the thermo-mechanical debonding technique to salvage the high-cost composite components without any damage. In this work, the temperature dependent storage modulus, loss modulus and tensile properties of the bulk modified epoxy film adhesive were measured through instrumented tests. Glass fibre reinforced composite and Ti–6Al–4V alloy sheets were bonded with the modified epoxy film adhesive and the floating roller peel performance was studied as a function of temperature to understand the load-displacement and failure mechanisms for generating a debonding map. The debonding region was identified in the temperature range between 1.17 T g and 1.33 T g. The knock-down in storage modulus and initial peel load exhibited a similar trend with respect to the temperature.

Effect of different debonding techniques on shear bond strength and enamel cracks in simulated clinical set-ups

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between debonding forces and enamel cracks length change between different debonding techniques. Methods80 extracted premolar teeth with intact buccal enamel were divided into five groups. In each group, enamel cracks were evaluated by stereomicroscope before and after debonding. All teeth were bonded with metal brackets by self-cure adhesive (3M, USA) and then debonded by bracket debonding plier, fixed on the UTM machine, through five methods based on location of plier on brackets: OGwing (occlusogingival), MDwing (mesiodistal), Oblique, OGbase (occlusogingival) and Cusp-base. ResultsBased on non-parametric distribution of data, there was no significant difference between groups in ARI and enamel cracks length change. The highest shear bond strength for debonding presented in OG base method (25.25 ± 8.4) and the difference was statistically significant (P-value = 0.029). There was no linear relationship between shear bond strength and cracks length change and also between ARI and cracks length change. ConclusionDespite the lower cracks length change in Cusp-base method than other groups, there wasn’t significant difference between debonding methods. Also the amount of debonding forces and ARI do not affect the changes of cracks length.

Survey on awareness and preference of ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists.

BackgroundThe objectives of this study was to evaluate the awareness of different ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists in the USA and the most commonly used debonding technique for ceramic bracket removal. Material and MethodsA survey on preference for debonding and awareness of debonding techniques was emailed to 2,227 members of the American Association of Orthodontists (AAO). Results119 orthodontists completed the survey. 111 responses were included in the study analysis of ceramic bracket users. The most common technique used was mechanical debonding. 86.5% used a specially designed bracket removing plier from the manufacturer. Overall, there were 59.5% of surveyed orthodontists who were aware of electrothermal debonding, 73% were unaware of ultrasonic debonding and 83.8% were unaware of laser debonding. There were more orthodontists with an affiliation with an academic institution aware of electrothermal debonding (p=0.002). There also was a trend of orthodontists having no affiliation with an institution who were unaware of laser debonding (p=0.015). ConclusionsThis survey showed that the majority of orthodontists who responded to the questionnaire were unaware of alternative debonding techniques of ceramic brackets. All orthodontists who use ceramic brackets utilized mechanical debonding technique. Key words:Orthodontic ceramic brackets, mechanical, electrothermal, ultrasonic, laser debonding.

Effectiveness of different debonding techniques and adjunctive methods on pain and discomfort perception during debonding fixed orthodontic appliances: a systematic review.

Pain is an unpleasant side-effect that can be experienced during orthodontic procedures including debonding of fixed appliances. Pain experience can vary depending on the appliance, debonding technique, as well as adjunctive measures used. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of different debonding techniques and adjunctive methods on pain/discomfort perception during debonding procedure (PDP) of fixed orthodontic appliances. The secondary objective was to assess the effects of anatomic location and gender on PDP of fixed orthodontic appliances. Multiple electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2018. Reference lists of the included articles were manually screened. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers according to Cochrane guidelines, with disputes resolved by a third reviewer. Clinical heterogeneity in study design and methodology prevented quantitative synthesis of the data. The search yielded 198 articles after the removal of duplicates. Seven studies were included in the final review with a total of 307 participants aged 12-60 years. Of the four studies comparing different debonding instruments of labial fixed appliances, two studies showed that the lift-off debonding instrument (LODI) produced lower PDP levels than ligature cutting pliers. Three studies compared adjunctive measures to reduce PDP of labial fixed appliances. Finger pressure and bite wafers significantly reduced PDP levels. Analgesics administration (ibuprofen + paracetamol tablets) 1 hour prior to debonding also reduced PDP. PDP was significantly higher in anterior segments and in females. The authors acknowledge that there was clinical heterogeneity among the included studies and that the potential effect of diurnal variation on pain during debonding was not considered in any of the included trials. There is weak evidence indicating that using the LODI may reduce PDP of labial fixed appliances. Adjunctive measures such as an intrusive force with finger pressure, bite wafers, and preoperative analgesia may further aid PDP control. Further well-designed parallel-group RCTs taking into consideration the diurnal variation in pain are required. PROSPERO (CRD42017084474). None. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Cost-benefit analysis of antibiofilm microbiological techniques for peri-prosthetic joint infection diagnosis

BackgroundImplant-related infections, including those of peri-prosthetic joint (PJIs), osteosynthesis and other biomaterials, are biofilm-related. Pathogen identification is considered the diagnostic benchmark; however, the presence of bacterial biofilms makes pathogen detection with traditional microbiological techniques only partially effective. To improve microbiological diagnostic accuracy, some biofilm debonding techniques have been recently proposed. Aim of this health economics assessment study was to evaluate their economic impact on hospital costs.MethodsDirect and indirect hospital costs connected with the routine introduction of sonication and dithiothreitol treatment applied to hip and knee PJIs and of tissue cultures were examined. In particular the consequences of diagnostic inaccuracy, the opportunities, costs, and risks of each technique were calculated.ResultsConsidering an average of five samples per patient, processed separately with traditional tissue culture with or without sonication of prosthetic components, or pooled together using the MicroDTTect device (a close system for sample collection, transport and treatment with Dithiothreitol for microbial release from biofilm), the overall mean direct cost per patient was € 397 and € 393 for sonication or MicroDTTect, respectively, compared to € 308 for traditional tissue cultures. In terms of opportunity costs, MicroDTTect was the most effective technique, allowing for a 35% or 55% reduction in time required for sample treatment, compared to tissue cultures combined or not with sonication, respectively.Pooling together direct and indirect costs associated with false positive and negative results of the different diagnostic techniques, unnecessary medical treatments and possible medical claims, MicroDTTect or sonication become increasingly cost-effective when the extra-costs, generated by diagnostic inaccuracy of traditional tissue culture, took place, respectively, in 2% or 20% or more of the patients.ConclusionsThis is the first study specifically focused on the economic impact of the routine clinical use of microbiological antibiofilm sampling and processing techniques in orthopaedics. Although our results may suffer from a potential country and hospital bias, as the data collection process for direct and indirect costs is specific to each institution and country, this analysis highlights the potential economic advantage to hospitals associated with the routine introduction of antibiofilm techniques for microbiological diagnosis of PJI.

Enhancing the out-of-plane performance of masonry walls using engineered cementitious composite

Abstract A novel technique for enhancing the out-of-plane behaviour of masonry infill walls is proposed herein. The technique involves the use of a thin layer of engineered cementitious composite (ECC) which is fully or partially bonded onto the face of masonry walls. To investigate the feasibility of this technique, the present research focuses on studying the behaviour of a series of beam-like masonry specimens with or without an ECC retrofitting layer subjected to a four-point bending load. The load is applied monotonically to failure at rates of 1 mm/min or 200 mm/min. The results show that the ECC-retrofitted specimens exhibited a significant enhancement in the out-of-plane performance in terms of strength, stiffness and deflection compared to the un-strengthened specimens. It is observed that specimens with a partially bonded ECC layer out-performed their counterparts having a fully bonded ECC layer. The partially de-bonding technique is found to allow the ECC layer achieve its full ductility potential. The results also reveal that specimens subjected to an elevated loading rate exhibited a greater load-carrying capacity and stiffness but lower deflection.

Comparison of two different debonding techniques in orthodontic treatment.

The purpose of this research is to investigate whether and how the adhesive bond failure site varied in relation to the material used for the orthodontic bonding and debonding technique applied. Two different methods of orthodontic debonding were included in our survey; cutters for orthodontics and debonding plier. Three different materials for the adhesion of the bracket: composite light curing, self-curing composite and glass ionomer cement. The remaining amount of adhesive on the tooth surface is an important parameter that gives information on how the location of the posting site varied during the debonding. 60 dental elements, maxillary and mandibular, previously extracted for orthodontic reasons, as well as periodontal, were included in our research. We investigated a possible significant correlation between different variables (debonding technique and materials for membership) and the ARI index. The use of orthodontic cutters or debonding pliers does not affect the adhesive bond failure site and both techniques have a tendency to leave a significant amount of adhesive on the surface enamel. In the resin-reinforced glass ionomer cements, detachment occurs at the interface enamel-adhesive and this pattern of detachment increases the risk of the enamel damage during debonding. In both types of composite resins (photopolymerizable or self-curing), the detachment occurs at the interface bracketing adhesive. In this case the amount of remaining adhesive material on the tooth must be removed with further methods, which in addition, increase the risk of iatrogenic injury as well as the working hours.

Enamel Quality after Debonding: Evaluation by Optical Coherence Tomography

The aims of this study were to evaluate quantitatively the enamel fractures, adhesive remnants and bracket fragments on enamel after debonding of metal and ceramic brackets, and to quantify the layer of adhesive remnants in depth after two different cleanup procedures. Metal and ceramic brackets were bonded on 120 human incisors and then debonded using two different techniques with Side Cutter (SC) and Anterior Bracket Removal plier (ABR). After this, a high-speed tungsten carbide finishing bur or a low-speed tungsten carbide finishing bur was used. The debonded samples were submitted to enamel assessment with optical coherence tomography (OCT). In sequence, two different methods of removing the remaining adhesive (tungsten carbide burs at high and low speed) were performed and at the end of these procedures, the remaining adhesive layer was measured with OCT. The results demonstrated that enamel fractures were observed only in the samples bonded with ceramic brackets, and the type of pliers did not influence the incidence and extent of enamel damage. Moreover, the type of debonding technique (with side-cutting pliers or anterior bracket removal pliers) and the type of bracket did not influence the amount of adhesive remaining after debonding. The burs at low speed removed the remaining adhesive more effectively during cleanup procedures.

Evaluation of Enamel Loss with Polycrystalline Ceramic Bracket using two different Debonding Techniques

Introduction: Debonding of ceramic brackets requires a technique that will restore the enamel surface possibly to its pretreatment condition.Objective: To evaluate a comparative degree of enamel loss with various debonding techniques.Materials &amp; Method: 30 extracted premolars were divided into three equal groups of 10 each on the basis of bonding material used. Six subgroups comprising of 5 teeth each were formed on the basis of debonding techniques. Debonded enamel surfaces were photographed under Scanning Electron Microscope to evaluate the enamel loss percentage and compared using oneway ANOVA.Result: Decreasing order of enamel surface loss was 63.1%, 56.3%, 45.4%, 43%, 31% and 30.5% for light cure–mechanical, light cure-electrothermal, self cure-mechanical, self cure-electrothermal, single composite-mechanical and single compositeelectrothermalcombination respectively.Conclusion: Mechanical debonding leads to greater enamel loss than electrothermal debonding. Bonding with Light cure composite always leads to greater enamel loss irrespective of type of debonding technique. Bonding with single composite always leads to lesser enamel loss irrespective of debonding technique.