Comparison of two different debonding techniques in orthodontic treatment

Abstract

Aim. The purpose of this research is to investigate whether and how the adhesive bond failure site varied in relation to the material used for the orthodontic bonding and debonding technique applied.

Materials and methods. Two different methods of orthodontic debonding were included in our survey; cutters for orthodontics and debonding plier. Three different materials for the adhesion of the bracket: composite light curing, self-curing composite and glass ionomer cement. The remaining amount of adhesive on the tooth surface is an important parameter that gives information on how the location of the posting site varied during the debonding. 60 dental elements, maxillary and mandibular, previously extracted for orthodontic reasons, as well as periodontal, were included in our research. We investigated a possible significant correlation between different variables (debonding technique and materials for membership) and the ARI index.

Conclusions. The use of orthodontic cutters or debonding pliers does not affect the adhesive bond failure site and both techniques have a tendency to leave a significant amount of adhesive on the surface enamel. In the resin-reinforced glass ionomer cements, detachment occurs at the interface enamel-adhesive and this pattern of detachment increases the risk of the enamel damage during debonding. In both types of composite resins (photopolymerizable or self-curing), the detachment occurs at the interface bracketing adhesive. In this case the amount of remaining adhesive material on the tooth must be removed with further methods, which in addition, increase the risk of iatrogenic injury as well as the working hours.