ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2026
Debonding of Clear Aligner Attachments With Fluorescence-Aided Identification Technique (FIT): An In Vitro Study.
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this in vitro study was to investigate whether removing fluorescent clear aligner attachments under UV light improves the efficiency of attachment removal and reduces enamel loss and composite residue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Clear aligner attachments were bonded to bovine teeth using fluorescent-modified composite (AlignerFlow LC, VOCO, Germany); 20 models were prepared. In a split-mouth design, attachments were removed either using a fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) under UV light, or with standard white light (non-FIT). Removal time was recorded for each attachment. Intraoral surface and optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans (T0, T1) were analyzed to quantify enamel loss and composite residue using Avizo Software, while OCT scans were assessed using a dichotomous scale for enamel loss and a four-point scale for composite residue.
resultsAlthough there is a trend toward faster attachment removal with FIT, measurements of removal time did not differ significantly between the groups due to high inter-individual variability. Volumetric analysis revealed a significant reduction in composite residue with FIT, while no significant differences in enamel loss were detected between the groups. OCT measurements revealed no significant differences between groups, as composite residue and enamel loss occurred on a microscopic scale in most of the specimens, regardless of the debonding method.
conclusionWhile neither debonding time nor enamel loss were affected, FIT significantly reduced residual composite after attachment removal, suggesting that FIT may contribute to more standardized clinical outcomes. Future in vivo studies with larger sample sizes, multiple operators, and different adhesive systems are needed to validate these findings.
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.