A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ENAMEL SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF TWO DIFFERENT BONDING ADHESIVES AFTER DEBONDING WITH ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY

Introduction: The goal of this research was to evaluate the pain felt by patients after veneers were debonded and gum remnants were removed using a tungsten carbide (TC) brush from two different cement frameworks: light fix composite and glass ionomer concrete glues. So long as we assume the null hypothesis is true, the two adhesive solutions do not vary in their ability to smooth out imperfections on the enamel surface. Materials and methods :- Based on the consideration and prohibition models, this in vitro study examined sixty newly removed human premolar teeth (n = 60) to assess orthodontic plans. Light fix cement (Trans bond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA) was used to strengthen the metal portions in Group I (n = 30), whereas light glass ionomer concrete (GC Fuji Ortho LC, Tokyo, Japan) was used to accomplish the same in Group II (n = 30). The dried residues of the concrete glue were removed using a TC brush and a slow-speed handpiece. Maximum roughness (Rmax), root mean square roughness (Rq), and roughness (Ra) were all determined at time zero (before holding). and their attributes were compared to those at time two (after debonding and completion). Results:-The two groups had very different experiences with the roughness of the polished surface when held. The composite resin and glass ionomer cement groups had statistically significant (p0.001) differences in surface roughness.  Conclusion:- After debonding the sections and finishing with a TC brush, the surface roughness of the veneer significantly increased with both the light fix and the glass ionomer strong concrete structures. The enamel surface roughness of the light cure group was worse than that of the glass ionomer cement group.