Evaluation of different types of polishing of composite resin surfaces after the removal of metal and ceramic brackets

Authors

  • Mariana de Oliveira Viana São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Adriana Aparecida Faziolli Almeida Dias São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Silvia Amélia Scudeler Vedovello São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Flávia Martão Flório São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Rogério Heladio Lopes Motta São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Jose Augusto Rodrigues Guarulhos University - UnG.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2015.v18i1.1085

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectivenessof different methods ofcomposite resin polishingafter the removaloforthodontic brackets. Material and Methods: 160resindiscsmade froma matrix ofacrylic resinwere divided into4 groups,according to thetype of composite resinused: G1 - microfilled(n = 40), G2 -microhybrid(n = 40), G3 -nanohybrid(n = 40)and G4-nanofilled(n = 40). One half of the samples wassubjectedto thermocycling, at 2000 cycles from 5 ? 2 ºC to 55 ? 2 ºC, for 1 min each. Halfof each group of resins was bonded with Gemini™ metallic brackets (3MUnitek) andthe otherhalf with Transcend™ ceramic brackets (3MUnitek). Thebrackets were transferred to auniversal testing machine (EMIC DLmodel2000).Half of the specimensfrom eachsubgroupwere polishedwith diamond burs andthe other halfwithSof-Lex discs. The averagesurface roughness of composite resin discswas measured,using aprofilometer,before the bondingof brackets, after the removal of brackets, after removing theexcess resinandafter polishing. Results: After removal of bracketsandafter polishing, the surface roughnesswas greater in the microhybridgroup(ANOVA, p < 0.05).After removalof ceramicbrackets, the groups showedhigher surfaceroughness (ANOVA, p < 0.05). There was no significantdifference inroughnessrelated tothermocyclingand the type ofpolishing.Conclusion:The qualityof thepolishis subjectedto the type ofresinused. Ceramicbrackets provided rougher surfacesafter removal. Both types ofpolishingusedare effective.

Author Biographies

Mariana de Oliveira Viana, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DDS, MS, Department of Orthodontics,

Adriana Aparecida Faziolli Almeida Dias, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DDS, Department of Orthodontics,

Silvia Amélia Scudeler Vedovello, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DDS, MS, ScD, Department of Orthodontics

Flávia Martão Flório, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DDS, MS, ScD, Department of Public Health,

Rogério Heladio Lopes Motta, São Leopoldo Mandic School of Dentistry and Research Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DDS, MS, ScD, Department of Pharmacology,

Jose Augusto Rodrigues, Guarulhos University - UnG.

DDS, MS, ScD, Department of Dentistry.

Downloads

Published

2015-03-26

Issue

Section

Clinical or Laboratorial Research