Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 30, 2026
03:10
Pilot In Vitro Study to Assess Cleaning Ability and Effects of Different Decontamination Methods on Implant Surfaces
Published on: November 21, 2025
330
Efficiency of different protocols for enamel clean-up after bracket debonding: an in vitro study
Lara Carvalho Freitas Sigilião1, Mariana Marquezan2, Carlos Nelson Elias3
1Brazilian Navy, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
|November 13, 2015
Summary
Six enamel cleaning protocols after bracket debonding were evaluated for efficiency. All methods proved effective, with longer procedure times correlating to smoother enamel surfaces and no significant increase in roughness.
Area of Science:
- Dental materials science
- Orthodontic technology
- Surface analysis
Background:
- Bracket debonding can leave residual adhesive on tooth enamel.
- Inadequate enamel cleaning may lead to surface alterations and affect aesthetics.
- Efficient clean-up protocols are crucial for restoring enamel integrity post-orthodontic treatment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the efficiency of six different enamel clean-up protocols after bracket debonding.
- To assess the impact of various tools on enamel surface roughness (Ra and Rz).
- To analyze the correlation between procedure time and enamel surface changes.
Main Methods:
- Sixty premolars were divided into six groups, each subjected to a specific clean-up protocol (12-blade bur low/high speed, 30-blade bur low speed, DU10CO ORTHO polisher, Renew System, Diagloss polisher).
- Surface roughness (Ra, Rz) was measured using a profilometer before and after cleaning.
- Enamel topography was examined via scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
- Statistical analysis included paired t-tests, ANOVA, Tukey tests, and Pearson's correlation.
Main Results:
- Protocols using the 30-blade bur (low speed), DU10CO ORTHO polisher, Renew System, and Diagloss polisher resulted in significantly smoother enamel surfaces (p < 0.05).
- The 12-blade bur at both low and high speeds did not significantly alter original enamel roughness.
- A negative, moderate correlation was found between procedure time and changes in enamel roughness (∆Ra, ∆Rz).
- Longer clean-up times were associated with reduced surface roughness.
Conclusions:
- All tested enamel clean-up protocols were deemed efficient as they did not increase surface roughness.
- The duration of the clean-up procedure positively influenced the outcome, with longer times yielding smoother enamel surfaces.
- Specific protocols, including the 30-blade bur and polishers, effectively smoothed the enamel post-debonding.
