Philipp Ratzka, Paul Zaslansky, Paul-Georg Jost-Brinkmann
{"title":"扫描电子显微镜评估在正畸环境中使用不同空气抛光粉的牙釉质表面:一项体外研究。","authors":"Philipp Ratzka, Paul Zaslansky, Paul-Georg Jost-Brinkmann","doi":"10.1007/s00056-023-00466-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this in vitro study was to quantify and compare changes of the enamel surface caused by periodical use of different air-polishing powders during multibracket therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Bovine high-gloss polished enamel specimens were air-polished using an AIR-FLOW® Master Piezon with maximum powder and water settings. Each specimen was blasted with sodium bicarbonate (AIR-FLOW® Powder Classic, Electro Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) and erythritol (AIR-FLOW® Powder Plus, Electro Medical Systems). Blasting duration was adapted to the powders' cleaning efficacy and corresponded to 25 air-polishing treatments in a patient with braces. A spindle apparatus ensured uniform guidance at a distance of 4 mm and a 90° angle. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were performed with the use of low vacuum scanning electron microscopy. Following external filtering and image processing, arithmetical square height (S<sub>a</sub>) and root mean square height (S<sub>q</sub>) were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both prophy powders caused a significant increase in enamel roughness. Surfaces blasted with sodium bicarbonate (S<sub>a</sub> = 64.35 ± 36.65 nm; S<sub>q</sub> = 80.14 ± 44.80 nm) showed significantly (p < 0.001) higher roughness than samples treated with erythritol (S<sub>a</sub> = 24.40 ± 7.42 nm; S<sub>q</sub> = 30.86 ± 9.30 nm). The observed defects in enamel structure caused by sodium bicarbonate extended across prism boundaries. Prism structure remained intact after air-polishing with erythritol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both applied air-polishing powders led to surface alterations. Despite shorter treatment times, sodium bicarbonate was significantly more abrasive than erythritol. Clinicians must compromise between saving time and abrasively removing healthy enamel.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":" ","pages":"404-413"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496338/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of enamel surfaces using different air-polishing powders in the orthodontic setting: an in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Philipp Ratzka, Paul Zaslansky, Paul-Georg Jost-Brinkmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00056-023-00466-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this in vitro study was to quantify and compare changes of the enamel surface caused by periodical use of different air-polishing powders during multibracket therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Bovine high-gloss polished enamel specimens were air-polished using an AIR-FLOW® Master Piezon with maximum powder and water settings. Each specimen was blasted with sodium bicarbonate (AIR-FLOW® Powder Classic, Electro Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) and erythritol (AIR-FLOW® Powder Plus, Electro Medical Systems). Blasting duration was adapted to the powders' cleaning efficacy and corresponded to 25 air-polishing treatments in a patient with braces. A spindle apparatus ensured uniform guidance at a distance of 4 mm and a 90° angle. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were performed with the use of low vacuum scanning electron microscopy. Following external filtering and image processing, arithmetical square height (S<sub>a</sub>) and root mean square height (S<sub>q</sub>) were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both prophy powders caused a significant increase in enamel roughness. Surfaces blasted with sodium bicarbonate (S<sub>a</sub> = 64.35 ± 36.65 nm; S<sub>q</sub> = 80.14 ± 44.80 nm) showed significantly (p < 0.001) higher roughness than samples treated with erythritol (S<sub>a</sub> = 24.40 ± 7.42 nm; S<sub>q</sub> = 30.86 ± 9.30 nm). The observed defects in enamel structure caused by sodium bicarbonate extended across prism boundaries. Prism structure remained intact after air-polishing with erythritol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both applied air-polishing powders led to surface alterations. Despite shorter treatment times, sodium bicarbonate was significantly more abrasive than erythritol. Clinicians must compromise between saving time and abrasively removing healthy enamel.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"404-413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496338/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-023-00466-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-023-00466-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of enamel surfaces using different air-polishing powders in the orthodontic setting: an in vitro study.
Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to quantify and compare changes of the enamel surface caused by periodical use of different air-polishing powders during multibracket therapy.
Methods: Bovine high-gloss polished enamel specimens were air-polished using an AIR-FLOW® Master Piezon with maximum powder and water settings. Each specimen was blasted with sodium bicarbonate (AIR-FLOW® Powder Classic, Electro Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) and erythritol (AIR-FLOW® Powder Plus, Electro Medical Systems). Blasting duration was adapted to the powders' cleaning efficacy and corresponded to 25 air-polishing treatments in a patient with braces. A spindle apparatus ensured uniform guidance at a distance of 4 mm and a 90° angle. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were performed with the use of low vacuum scanning electron microscopy. Following external filtering and image processing, arithmetical square height (Sa) and root mean square height (Sq) were determined.
Results: Both prophy powders caused a significant increase in enamel roughness. Surfaces blasted with sodium bicarbonate (Sa = 64.35 ± 36.65 nm; Sq = 80.14 ± 44.80 nm) showed significantly (p < 0.001) higher roughness than samples treated with erythritol (Sa = 24.40 ± 7.42 nm; Sq = 30.86 ± 9.30 nm). The observed defects in enamel structure caused by sodium bicarbonate extended across prism boundaries. Prism structure remained intact after air-polishing with erythritol.
Conclusion: Both applied air-polishing powders led to surface alterations. Despite shorter treatment times, sodium bicarbonate was significantly more abrasive than erythritol. Clinicians must compromise between saving time and abrasively removing healthy enamel.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.