ArticleProgress in orthodontics2019
Comparative evaluation of enamel surface roughness after debonding using four finishing and polishing systems for residual resin removal-an in vitro study.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of resin remnant removal techniques on enamel and composite restoration surfaces after orthodontic debonding.Odontology · 2026Article
- Does attachment removal damage enamel? Influence of adhesive, resin, and bur on surface integrity.European journal of oral sciences · 2026Article
- Enamel Integrity and Residual Composite Following Clear Aligner Attachment Removal: A Systematic Review.Clinics and practice · 2026Review
- The enamel loss and adhesive remnants after bracket removal and various adhesive removal methods: an in vitro experimental study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Effect of multi-system polishing on shear bond strength of nanohybrid composites to enamel: anPeerJ · 2026Article
- Quantitative and qualitative assessment of enamel surface alterations induced by three different interproximal reduction systems: A comparativeBioinformation · 2026Article
- Bond strength of debonded orthodontic brackets after different reconditioning and priming protocols: An in vitro study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Impact of prophylaxis pastes and application techniques on immature enamel surface roughness: an in-vitro study.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Article
- 3-Dimensional topographic enamel surface changes after different debonding techniques for aligner attachments: a micro-CT study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Article
- The interplay between toothbrush stiffness and charcoal-containing dentifrice on the development of enamel topography changes.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Enamel surface roughness after orthodontic adhesive removal: an in vitro study comparing four clearance methods.European oral research · 2024Article
- Article
- In Vitro Study on the Influence of the Buccal Surface Convexity of the Tooth upon Enamel Loss after Bracket Removal.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of Enamel Surface Integrity after De-Bracketing as Affected by Seven Different Orthodontic Residual Cement Removal Systems.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Influence of Various Adhesive Systems and Polishing Methods on Enamel Surface Roughness after Debonding of Orthodontic Brackets: A Three-Dimensional In Vitro Evaluation.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Enamel Evaluation after Debonding of Fixed Retention and Polishing Treatment with Three Different Methods.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A comparison of traditional orthodontic polishing systems with composite polishing systems following orthodontic debonding.The Saudi dental journal · 2021Article
- Minimizing the aerosol-generating procedures in orthodontics in the era of a pandemic: Current evidence on the reduction of hazardous effects for the treatment team and patients.American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2020Review
- Comparison of the Enamel Surface Roughness from Different Polishing Methods: Scanning Electron Microscopy and Atomic Force Microscopy Investigation.European journal of dentistry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrthodontic bonding and debonding procedures involve risk of damaging the enamel surface and changing its original morphology. The rough surface inhibits proper cleaning, invites plaque deposition, bacterial retention, and stain formation thus dampening the esthetic appearance of the teeth. Restoring the enamel to its original morphology is a challenge. Researches on better adhesive removal methods which can effectively remove the residual resin and restore it best to its original form are continuing till date. No study has compared four contemporary finishing systems for their efficiency on a single platform.
aimThe objective of this study is to evaluate and compare enamel surface roughness after debonding using four different finishing and polishing systems. MATERIAL AND
methodsAdhesive resin was removed from the buccal surface of 88 premolars after debonding with 4 groups. It included 22 teeth per group: group 1-One gloss system; group 2-Enhance finishing and polishing system; group 3-fiber reinforced stainbuster bur; and group 4-Soflex discs with wheels. Roughness was measured quantitatively and qualitatively with the help of surface roughness tester and scanning electron Microscope (SEM) respectively.
resultsNo significant difference was found in baseline roughness in four groups. Highest post-polishing roughness was observed in Soflex group (4.62 μm) followed by One gloss system (3.36 μm), Enhance system (3.17 μm), and stainbuster bur (1.99 μm) (p value < 0.01).
conclusionStainbuster bur created the smoothest enamel surface that was close to the natural enamel followed by Enhance system, One gloss system, and Soflex disc and wheels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.