Comparison of Enamel Roughness and Calcium Release between Manual and Mechanical Stripping with and without Polishing after Demineralization

Negar  Asgarian; Elham  Ahmadi; Farzaneh Sadeghi  Mahounak; Mohammad Javad Kharrazi  Fard; Mohammad Sadegh Ahmad  Akhoundi

doi:10.18502/fid.v23i10.21495

Negar Asgarian Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
Elham Ahmadi Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Farzaneh Sadeghi Mahounak Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Mohammad Javad Kharrazi Fard Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Mohammad Sadegh Ahmad Akhoundi Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/fid.v23i10.21495

Keywords: Dental Polishing; Microscopy, Atomic Force; Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; Orthodontic Appliances; Spectrophotometry

Abstract

Objectives: Proximal enamel stripping is one way to create space in orthodontic treatments that leaves grooves on the enamel surface and predispose teeth to caries. The aim of this study was to compare the two common stripping systems and the effect of polishing after the stripping process on the level of surface roughness.

Materials and Methods: Twenty-five extracted teeth were randomly divided into five groups:untreated control (C), mechanical stripping (Sn), mechanical stripping and polishing (Sp), manual stripping (Dn), manual stripping and polishing (Dp). Mechanical stripping was performed using SWISS denta care Quality oscillating system, Dentaurum hand tapes were used for manual stripping and Soflex disks were used for polishing. Teeth underwent pH-cycling and the amount of released calcium was measured by spectrometry. Samples were examined under an atomic force microscope (AFM) before and after demineralization. Baseline and post-demineralization surface roughness values (Ra, Rq, Rz) were calculated. Finally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained from two samples of each group. data analysis was done by One-way ANOVA. P-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: There was no significant difference between the stripping methods in terms of surface roughness parameters, but there was a significant difference between the polished and unpolished groups (P<0.05). Calcium release was significantly lower in the Sp group compared to the other groups (P<0.05). In SEM images, the least amount enamel damage was related to the Sp group.

Conclusion: Unlike stripping systems, polishing is considerably useful in decreasing enamel roughness. Totally, mechanical stripping and polishing has shown the best consequences on enamel structure.