ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2025
Differences of enamel surface after bracket debonding and adhesive removal with tungsten carbide, steel bur, and adhesive removing plier.
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOne of the goals of orthodontic treatment is to restore the enamel surface to its pretreatment condition. The objective of this research is to compare the differences in enamel surfaces after adhesive removal using tungsten carbide burs, steel burs, and adhesive-removing pliers. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total sample of 40 extracted premolars were randomly divided into four groups based on the adhesive removal method: control, tungsten carbide bur, steel bur, and adhesive-removing plier. The enamel surface condition was scanned using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Mann-Whitney test was performed to evaluate the differences in enamel surfaces between the groups.
resultsAdhesive removal using tungsten carbide burs and steel burs showed (none) no statistically significant differences (
conclusionTungsten carbide bur demonstrated the best enamel surface condition and less adhesive remnant compared to the steel bur and adhesive-removing plier.
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.