Fluorescence Behaviour of Flowable Adhesives for Attachment Removal in Clear Aligner Therapy: An in-vitro study

Authors: Dr. Esha Pandey, Dr. Jeenal Gupta, Dr. Amit Bhardwaj

DOI: 10.18231/j.jco.9603.1408363510

Keywords: Fluorescence Aided Identification Technique, Attachments, Enamel loss, Colour saturation

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The study was conducted to compare fluorescence behaviour of four different commercially available flowable composite materials and to compare enamel loss and residual material of these composite in clear aligner therapy. INTRODUCTION: Fluorescence is a property of a substance that absorbs light and within 10 sec of activation, spontaneously emits light at a larger wavelength which is useful for adhesive identification during removal. MATERIALS AND METHOD: For the in-vitro study, 84 extracted premolar teeth were taken. The attachments were placed with the help of four different adhesives. The fluorescence of the composites was measured on the clinical photographs by using Colour-picker tool. The tungsten carbide bur with low-speed hand- piece tungsten carbide was used to remove the composite under Fluorescent Light Emitting Diode (LED) (405 ± 10 nm). The volumetric analysis of the enamel surface and adhesive was done by superimposition of the pre and post scans with the help of Omnicam software. RESULTS: The fluorescence was highest in G-aenial universal flow [98.00 ± 0.816], followed by Tetric N flow [95.00 ± 0.816], Polofil NHT Flow [94.5 ± 1.914], and was minimum in Filtek Supreme ultra flowable [52.50 ± 4.509]. enamel loss [ 1.35 ± 0.460] and adhesive remaining [1.35 ± 0.460] was highest in Filtek Supreme ultra flowable (p-value<.05). CONCLUSION: The difference in fluorescence of commonly used flowable composites was seen both clinically and statistically. G-aenial universal flow showed the best results with minimum enamel loss and residual adhesive.