Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of enamel after various stripping methods

Introduction: In this study, we investigated ultramorphology, surface roughness, and microhardness of permanent and deciduous tooth enamel after various stripping methods. Methods: One hundred twenty deciduous and permanent teeth (n = 60 each) were used. Qualitative (scanning electron microscopy) an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics 2006-08, Vol.130 (2), p.131.e7-131.e14
Hauptverfasser: Arman, Ayca, Cehreli, S. Burcak, Ozel, Emre, Arhun, Neslihan, Çetinşahin, Alev, Soyman, Mubin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction: In this study, we investigated ultramorphology, surface roughness, and microhardness of permanent and deciduous tooth enamel after various stripping methods. Methods: One hundred twenty deciduous and permanent teeth (n = 60 each) were used. Qualitative (scanning electron microscopy) and quantitative (surface roughness and microhardness tests) experiments were carried out in the following experimental groups: group 1, stripping disk; group 2, diamond-coated metal strip; group 3, stripping disk and Sof-Lex discs (3M-ESPE, Seefeld, Germany); group 4, diamond-coated metal strip and Sof-Lex discs; group 5 (chemical stripping), 37% orthophosphoric acid in conjunction with diamond-coated metal strip; group 6 (control), no stripping. Surface roughness values (Ra) for permanent and deciduous enamel were evaluated with Welch analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tamhane tests, and Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests, respectively. Microhardness values were evaluated statistically with Kruskal-Wallis, 1-way ANOVA, and Duncan tests. Results: Deciduous and permanent teeth showed similar results in terms of surface roughness and surface morphology. Groups 3 and 4 had the smoothest deciduous and permanent enamel surfaces, whereas chemical stripping (group 5) produced the roughest surfaces in both enamel types. Stripping did not lead to a significant change in the microhardness of permanent enamel. Conclusions: All stripping methods significantly roughened the enamel surfaces. Polishing the stripped surface with Sof-Lex discs decreased the roughness.
ISSN:0889-5406
1097-6752
DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.021