In vivo enamel stripping: A macroscopic and microscopic analytical study

Kaaouara, Yassine; Mohind, Hajar Ben; Azaroual, Mohamed Fawzi; Zaoui, Fatima; Bahije, Loubna; Benyahia, Hicham

doi:10.1016/j.ortho.2019.03.005

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In terms of superficial effects, Arman et al and Bonetti et al [9, 14] concluded that all stripping methods significantly roughened the enamel surfaces. According to the recent investigation of Kaaouara Y et al [26], our results revealed that mechanical oscillating diamond strips produced more regular surface, with light parallel lines and minor grooves than manual abrasive strips. After manual IPR procedures enamel presented a more irregular surface with extended groves, enamel ridges and irregular fragments suggesting some irregularities of manual abrasive track (Figs.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of the present investigation was to evaluate enamel reduction efficiency, abrasive property decay, and enamel effects between oscillating mechanical and manual systems for interproximal enamel reduction (IPR).MethodsThree oscillating strips and three manual strips were tested on twelve freshly extracted premolars blocked in an acrylic cylinder pot by means of a material testing machine. Each strip underwent one test of 8 cycles (30 s each). Both abrasive tracks and teeth surfaces were qualitative evaluated before and after IPR by means of SEM analysis. Efficiency and abrasive property decay of both IPR systems were investigated by the amount of enamel reduction within the eight-cycle testing. Independent t-test was used to evaluate differences in variables between the two systems.ResultsMechanical IPR system showed higher efficiency in terms of enamel reduction (p < 0.005) when compared with manual IPR system (0.16 mm and 0.09 mm, respectively). Quantity of removed enamel decreased throughout the 8 cycles for both systems. Less presence of enamel debris and detachment of abrasive grains were observed on mechanical strips rather than manual strips. SEM analysis revealed more regular surface of teeth undergone mechanical IPR procedures.ConclusionOscillating diamond strips showed more controlled efficiency when compared with the manual IPR system leading to a more regular enamel surface.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Harish et al (2020) stated that manual stripping caused less surface roughening than air rotor stripping (ARS, burs). On the contrary, earlier research by Kaaouara et al (2019) found that manual IPR strips produce a rough enamel surface, which is more susceptible to caries when compared to the intensive oscillating strips, which leave a smoother enamel surface. An older study (Baumgartner et al, 2015), however, which used profilometric analyses to measure surface roughness of the enamel after IPR with the oscillating intensive system, showed a significant increase in the roughness parameters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…(Littlewood and Mitchel, 2019;Parkar et al, 2020). The main concern of orthodontists regarding this method is related to the enamel integrity later and its susceptibility to caries attack (Kaaouara et al, 2019). Many efforts have been made to test the protective effect of different finishing protocols on the enamel after IPR procedures, to determine the best clinical regime to overcome any related risks ( Vicente et al, 2017( Vicente et al, , 2021.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the enamel nano-topography influenced by different techniques of interproximal reduction: An atomic force microscopic study

Butrus

Chawshli

2022

J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Interproximal enamel reduction is a part of the orthodontic treatment as a method of space generation in addition to other vast indications. Some studies found that different techniques might impose changes to the enamel surface that alter its topography, which in turn might influence its integrity and susceptibility to caries. Polishing, however, after this procedure is thought to be helpful to reduce these adverse effects. Aim: To evaluate the nano-topography of the enamel surfaces after interproximal reduction (IPR) and determine its influence on enamel surface roughness and examine the need for polishing to minimise these influences, when combined with topical fluoride application. Methods: A total of 60 proximal surfaces of 40 extracted maxillary premolars (10 premolars left unprepared as the control group) were reduced with different stripping instruments (discs, burs and manual strip system). The surface roughness of enamel was analysed with an atomic force microscope to determine the results quantitatively as well as qualitatively on the nanoscopic scale. One of each proximal surface was followed by polishing and fluoride varnish after the reduction. Results: The results showed that surface roughness was increased in all groups without polishing. The greatest mean roughness was recorded for the disc group (212 ±125.7), followed by the bur group (172 ±93.1) and manual strips (153.8±106.7). The difference between the groups, however, was not significant for both mean roughness ( P = 0.656) and height ( P = 0.737). The parameters were decreased after polishing in all groups but the difference between methods was not significant for both parameters ( P = 0.946 and P = 0.849); however, the mean height was reduced to nearly half the reading in the bur and manual strip method. The disc group only showed a statistically significant decrease in surface roughness with polishing ( P < 0.05). All other results were not significant. Conclusion: All methods of interproximal reduction do not influence enamel surface nanotopography significantly with and without polishing. Polishing resulted in significant reduction of surface roughness only in the disc group.

show abstract

“…However, 70% less surface roughness was observed in teeth submitted to air-rotor stripping and 30% in the teeth submitted to strip bands after the first month [31]. Kaaouara et al analyzed the interproximal tooth enamel surface using SEM and reported that single-side diamond strip bands showed a mean enamel roughness of 15 µm and ContactEZ diamond files, which also showed a mean enamel roughness of 10 µm [4]. Meredith et al analyzed the enamel nanotopography after interproximal enamel reduction using atomic force microscopy (AFM) and reported that the enamel surface becomes progressively smoother from burs to strips and discs to polishers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The result is an increase in the available space in the dental arch [1,2]. IER is considered a more conservative orthodontic therapy than dental extractions [3] and, therefore, it is used to increase the available space without tooth extractions, allowing for teeth alignment and correct labioversion of the incisors [4] with a mild or moderate bone-dental discrepancy (BDD) between 4-8 mm [5,6]. IER is also recommended to improve the unaesthetic appearance caused by the loss of the interdental papilla, which is a consequence of bone loss or occlusal interproximal tooth contact [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Digital Technique to Quantify the Area and Volume of Enamel Removal after Interproximal Enamel Reduction

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to show a novel and accurate digital measurement protocol by analyzing the area and volume for interproximal tooth enamel surface reduction. In total, 14 lower teeth from all dental sectors were embedded into an epoxy resin and distributed as the lower dental arch, keeping the contact points. The experimental model was submitted to an intraoral digital impression before and after interproximal tooth enamel surface reduction using air-rotor strips and then re-contouring and polishing the interproximal enamel surfaces. These steps helped obtain standard tessellation language (STL) digital files. Furthermore, each tooth in the preoperative and postoperative full-arch STL digital files was segmented individually and aligned to analyze the area and volume of the interproximal tooth enamel surface reduction using engineering morphometry software. Descriptive analysis of the area and volume of the interproximal tooth enamel surface reduction was performed using a Student t-test. Higher enamel reduction area (3.53 ± 3.08 mm2) and volume (0.32 ± 0.22 mm3) values were shown on the distal surface compared with the area (2.97 ± 3.05 mm2) and volume (0.22 ± 0.16 mm3) of the enamel reduction on the mesial surface measured using the morphometric measurement digital protocol. The morphometric measurement protocol is an accurate digital measurement protocol for analyzing the area and volume of interproximal enamel surface reduction.

show abstract

In vivo enamel stripping: A macroscopic and microscopic analytical study

Cited by 16 publications

References 12 publications

Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips

Comparison of the abrasive properties of two different systems for interproximal enamel reduction: oscillating versus manual strips

Evaluation of the enamel nano-topography influenced by different techniques of interproximal reduction: An atomic force microscopic study

A Novel Digital Technique to Quantify the Area and Volume of Enamel Removal after Interproximal Enamel Reduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About