ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2023
Assessment of enamel surface roughness and hardness with metal and ceramic orthodontic brackets using different etching and adhesive systems: An
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated Characterization by EDS and Roughness as a Diagnostic Tool for Dental Enamel Degradation: An In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Orthodontic Bracket Removal and Enamel Roughness: Comparing the Effects of Sapphire and Metallic Brackets in an In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Human Digestive Physiology and Evolutionary Diet: A Metabolomic Perspective on Carnivorous and Scavenger Adaptations.Metabolites · 2025Review
- Evaluation of dental enamel after debonding of sapphire brackets and removal of orthodontic adhesive remnants.Dental press journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate enamel surface roughness and microhardness following the use of different bracket materials (metal or ceramic), etchants (total- and self-etchants), and adhesive systems (precoated or flash-free). Method: A total of 99 extracted human premolars were selected for the analysis. The surface roughness was first assessed (roughness control). One specimen from each subgroup was examined using a scanning electron microscope to illustrate the surface topography. Eighty-eight teeth were prepared using total- or self-etchants and bonded to precoated or flash-free adhesive metal or ceramic brackets. The remaining 11 specimens were not bonded to brackets (microhardness controls). The brackets were debonded after immersion in distilled water for 24 h. The specimens were again scanned for surface roughness and topography imaging. Finally, the microhardness was assessed using a micro-Vickers hardness test at a force of 200 g for 10 s. Result: An overall statistically significant increase in surface roughness and reduced surface microhardness were observed in all experimental groups when compared with those in the control groups. The etchant type was the only variable found to contribute to the measured surface properties, with increased roughness and reduced microhardness introduced by total-etching compared to those by self-etching. Conclusion: Orthodontic brackets introduced a significant increase in enamel surface roughness and reduce microhardness compared with untreated enamel, regardless of the bracket material, etchant type, and adhesive system. The etchant type was the only variable contributing to these changes, with total etching having a more pronounced effect.
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.