- Visibility 119 Views
- Downloads 79 Downloads
- Permissions
- DOI doi: 10.18231/j.jco.9603.1408363510
-
CrossMark
Fluorescence behaviour of flowable adhesives for attachment removal in clear aligner therapy: An in-vitro study
- Author Details:
-
Esha Pandey *
-
Amit Bhardwaj
-
Jeenal Gupta
Esha Pandey *
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 composites in clear aligner therapy.
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 Methods: 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 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.
References
- Thawaba AA, Albelasy NF, Elsherbini AM, Hafez AM. Evaluation of enamel roughness after orthodontic debonding and clean-up procedures using zirconia, tungsten carbide, and white stone burs: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2023;23(1):478. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03194-6
[Google Scholar] - Alzainal AH, Majud AS, Al-Ani AM, Mageet AO. Orthodontic bonding: review of the literature. Int J Dent. 2020;2020(1):8874909.
- Alsaud BA, Hajjaj MS, Masoud AI, Abou Neel EA, Abuelenain DA, Linjawi AI. Bonding of clear aligner composite attachments to ceramic materials: An in vitro study. Materials. 2022;15(12):4145. DOI: 10.3390/ma15124145
[Google Scholar] - AlMogbel A. Clear Aligner Therapy: Up to date review article. J Orthod Sci. 2023;12;37
- Karan S, Kircelli BH, Tasdelen B. Enamel surface roughness after debonding: comparison of two different burs. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(6):1081–8. DOI: 10.2319/012610-55.1
[Google Scholar] - Chen Y, Mohamed AM, Jinbo WA, Ziwei ZH, Al-balaa M, Yan YA. Risk Factors of Composite Attachment Loss During Orthodontic Clear Aligner Therapy. 2021:6620377 . DOI: 10.1155/2021/6620377
[Google Scholar] - Rocha RS, Salomão FM, Silveira Machado L, Sundfeld RH, Fagundes TC. Efficacy of auxiliary devices for removal of fluorescent residue after bracket debonding. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(3):440–7.
- Lai C, Bush PJ, Warunek S, Covell Jr DA, Al-Jewair T. An in vitro comparison of ultraviolet versus white light in the detection of adhesive remnants during orthodontic debonding. Angle Orthod. 2019;89(3):438–45. DOI: 10.2319/072018-526.1
[Google Scholar] - Albertini P, Tauro R, Barbara L, Albertini E, Lombardo L. Fluorescence-aided removal of orthodontic composites: an in vivo comparative study. Prog Orthod. 2022;23(1):16. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-022-00411-w
[Google Scholar] - Yan J, Cao L, Luo T, Hua F, He H. In vitro evaluation of an easy-to- remove orthodontic adhesive with photochromic property. Angle Orthod. 2024;94(2):200–6. DOI: 10.2319/060223-392.1
[Google Scholar] - Tamer İ, Öztaş E, Marşan G. Orthodontic treatment with clear aligners and the scientific reality behind their marketing: a literature review. Turk J Orthod. 2019 ;32(4):241–6. DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2019.18083
[Google Scholar] - Ribeiro AA, Almeida LF, Martins LP, Martins RP. Assessing adhesive remnant removal and enamel damage with ultraviolet light: An in-vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;151(2):292–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.06.040
[Google Scholar] - Dhannawat PV, Gilani R, Shrivastav SS, Kamble RH, Murarka SP, Rathi SS, Vishnani R. Debonding Techniques--A Review. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2021;10(38):3430–6.
- Meller C, Connert T, Löst C, ElAyouti A. Reliability of a fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) for detecting tooth-colored restorations: an ex vivo comparative study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(1):347–55. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1797-0
[Google Scholar] - Meller C, Klein C. Fluorescence of composite resins: A comparison among properties of commercial shades. Dent Mater. 2015;34(6):754–65. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2014-219
[Google Scholar] - Dettwiler C, Eggmann F, Matthisson L, Meller C, Weiger R, Connert T. Fluorescence-aided composite removal in directly 487 Panday et al. / Journal of Contemporary Orthodontics 2025;9(4):481–487 restored permanent posterior teeth. Oper Dent. 2020;45(1):62-70. DOI: 10.2341/19-032-L
[Google Scholar] - Uo M, Okamoto M, Watari F, Tani K, Morita M, Shintani A. Rare earth oxide-containing fluorescent glass filler for composite resin. Dent Mater. 2005;24(1):49–52. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.24.49
[Google Scholar] - Leontiev W, Magni E, Dettwiler C, Meller C, Weiger R, Connert T. Accuracy of the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) for detecting tooth-colored restorations utilizing different fluorescence-inducing devices: an ex vivo comparative study. Clin Oral Investig. 2021:25(9)5189–96. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-
[Google Scholar] 03826-7 - Brokos I, Stavridakis M, Lagouvardos P, Krejci I. Fluorescence intensities of composite resins on photo images. Odontology. 2021;109(3):615–24. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-020-00583-z
[Google Scholar] - Hirata R, Benalcázar-Jalkh EB, Atria P, Cascales ÁF, Cantero JS, Sampaio CS. Analysis of translucency parameter and fluorescence intensity of 5 resin composite systems. J Clin Exp Dent. 2024;16(1):e71. DOI: 10.4317/jced.61174
[Google Scholar] - Meller C, Schott T. Integrity testing of a smooth surface resin sealant around orthodontic brackets using a new Fluorescence-aided Identification Technique (FIT). Angle Orthod. 2018;88(6):765–70. DOI: 10.2319/110217-748.1
[Google Scholar] - Janiszewska-Olszowska J, Tomkowski R, Tandecka K, Stepien P, Szatkiewicz T, Sporniak-Tutak K. et al. Effect of orthodontic debonding and residual adhesive removal on 3D enamel microroughness. Peer J. 2016;4:e2558.
- Ryf S, Flury S, Palaniappan S, Lussi A, Van Meerbeek B, Zimmerli B. Enamel loss and adhesive remnants following bracket removal and various clean-up procedures in vitro. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(1):25–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq128
[Google Scholar] - Auderset FC, Connert T, Meller C, Filippi A, Dagassan-Berndt DC. Evaluation of five methods to identify composite restorations in human teeth on a forensic purpose—An ex vivo comparative study. Int J Legal Med. 2024;138(1):85–96.