Orthodontic microabrasive reproximation

Joseph, V.P.; Rossouw, P. Emile; Basson, N J

doi:10.1016/0889-5406(92)70051-b

Cited by 54 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Polishing is generally suggested after IPR 4,5,25) . However, polishing alone cannot remove the deep surface irregularities that created by IPR whereas it also removes enamel materials to some extent 24) . In contrast, the treatments with fluoride varnish and resin infiltration are relatively non-invasive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of resin infiltration <i>vs.</i> fluoride varnish in enhancing enamel surface conditions after interproximal reduction

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the effect of resin infiltration vs. fluoride varnish in enhancing enamel surface conditions after interproximal reduction (IPR). After IPR procedures, 84 human enamel specimens were divided into three groups, group A/ group B was treated by fluoride varnish/resin infiltration according to the manufacturers' instructions, group C were treated with nothing. All the specimens were pH-cycled twice daily in 37°C bath for 30 days. Surface micro-hardness, density and mineral loss were measured before and after the pH cycling. The data were analyzed and compared using ANOVA. Both treatments A and B increased the surface microhardness of enamel after IPR (p<0.05). Both before and after pH cycling, the surface microhardness of A was significantly harder than B. The density of A was higher than B before pH cycling (p<0.05). Fluoride varnish and resin infiltration may provide an enamel protection from acid challenge.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…IPR could eliminate the undesirable results of extraction treatment and maintain alignment in the long-term stability 11,24) . However, IPR inevitably damages the intactness of the surface layer of enamel and increases biofilm accumulation 5,9) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of resin infiltration <i>vs.</i> fluoride varnish in enhancing enamel surface conditions after interproximal reduction

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results are in agreement with previous reports. 23,24 According to Piacentini and Sfondrini, 17 it is impossible to remove the grooves and trenches left on the enamel after grinding them with rough diamond burs and disks using conventional polishing and cleaning methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enamel Surfaces Following Interproximal Reduction with Different Methods

Danesh

Hellak

Lippold

et al. 2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the surface roughness resulting after application of currently available interproximal polishing. Materials and Methods: The analysis was carried out by means of digital subtraction radiography, profilometry, and scanning electron microscopy. The roughness of natural untreated enamel served as the reference. Five enamel reduction methods were tested (Profin, New Metal Strips, O-Drive D30, Air Rotor, and the Ortho-Strips) and were applied in accordance with their manufacturers' recommendations. Fifty-five teeth were treated by randomly chosen methods, all of which were applied by one person. One proximal surface was only ground and left unpolished while the other received the finishing and polish recommended by the manufacturer. Results: Loss of tooth substance, as measured by subtraction radiography, was significantly lower (P Ͻ .05) for the group treated with Ortho-Strips. Profilometric analysis of enamel roughness showed that the use of Ortho-Strips, O-Drive D30, and New Metal Strips in the grinding mode produced equally rough surfaces (P Ͼ .05). The Air Rotor and Profin system in the grinding mode produced the significantly (P Ͻ .05) roughest surfaces. A significant (P Ͻ .05) reduction of the mean roughness values was registered in all groups when treatment was followed by polishing. The Profin system and Ortho-Strips achieved the significantly smoothest surfaces (P Ͻ .05) with polishing. Conclusions: In general, interproximal enamel reduction should be followed by thorough polishing. Furthermore, oscillating systems seem to be advantageous.

show abstract

“…In addition, we aimed to determine the time needed to reduce 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 mm of enamel. Since a number of studies have shown that IER can significantly increase enamel roughness [16,[20][21][22], the second aim of the present study was to quantitatively assess enamel roughness before and after polishing using different polishing times.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%