Objective: To test the hypotheses that (1) there is no significant difference between the effects of two burs on the surface roughness of enamel after orthodontic debonding, and (2) there is no difference between resin removal times of the two burs.
Materials And Methods: The crowns of 20 premolars were embedded in acrylic blocks, and the buccal surfaces were subjected to atomic force microscopy (AFM), with measurement of initial roughness values. The brackets were bonded with a light-cured adhesive and were debonded with a debonding plier.
Objective: To compare the effects of two polishing systems on the surface roughness of three types of porcelain after orthodontic debonding.
Materials And Methods: A total of 90 porcelain discs were fabricated from feldspathic (n = 30), leucite-based (n = 30) or lithia disilicate-based (n = 30) ceramics. Ten samples in each group served as the control and received no surface treatment.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
August 2007
Introduction: The objectives of this study were to determine the effects of various surface conditioning methods on 3 types of ceramic materials (feldsphatic, leucite-based, and lithia disilicate-based) in orthodontic bonding.
Methods: A total of 210 ceramic disk samples were fabricated and divided into 3 groups. In each group, 5 subgroups were prepared by sandblasting; sandblasting and hydrofluoric (HF) acid; sandblasting and silane; sandblasting, HF acid, and silane; and tribochemical silica coating and silane.