American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Original ArticlesComparison of different bonding materials for laser debonding
Section snippets
Laser
The laser selected for this study was a CO2 (10.6 μm) laser (LX-20, Luxar, Bothell, Wash.). The illuminating output was controlled at 3 watts and 7 watts.
Brackets
Throughout this study, we used the most popular laser-aided debonding resistant ceramic bracket,7 polycrystalline alumina brackets (Transcend series 6000, Unitek/3M, Monrovia, Calif.). Maxillary premolar brackets were used.
Bonding materials
Two different bonding materials were selected for this study. One was a Bis-GMA composite resin, Concise (3M, St. Paul,
Control data (brackets debonded without laser)
Forty-three bonded teeth were prepared to confirm the efficiency of laser debonding. Twenty-three teeth were prepared with Concise and the other 20 with Super-Bond.
Enamel fracture occurred in two teeth in the Concise group. Complete bracket failure at the slot was observed in a tooth bonded by Concise. Therefore these three teeth were omitted from the data. The data obtained are summarized in Tables I and II. The shear bond strength of the two control samples was not significantly different
Discussion
The effects of laser-aided ceramic brackets debonding were investigated with the use of a CO2 laser.
Conclusion
- 1.
Laser-aided debonding was very efficient for debonding ceramic brackets.
- 2.
No enamel fracture was observed in the laser-debonding groups, whereas two teeth of the Bis-GMA (Concise) control group were fractured at debonding.
- 3.
MMA (Super-Bond) resin was easier to debond with the laser beam than Bis-GMA (Concise). The applied energy was significantly lower in MMA (Super-Bond) than Bis-GMA (Concise).
- 4.
Laser-focused adhesives tended to be removed with the bracket in the Bis-GMA (Concise) groups, whereas
References (11)
- et al.
Enamel abrasion from ceramic orthodontic brackets under an artificial oral environment
Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop
(1990) - et al.
Bond strength of ceramic brackets under shear stress: an in vitro report
Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop
(1990) - et al.
Comparisons of different bonding techniques of ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part I. Background and methods
Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop
(1990) - et al.
Comparisons of different bonding techniques of ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part II. Findings and clinical implications
Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop
(1990) - et al.
Laser-aided debonding of orthodontic ceramic brackets
Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop
(1992)
Cited by (42)
Shear bond strength of two 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesives when bonding ceramic brackets to bovine enamel
2017, International OrthodonticsEffect of the gel form of eucalyptol on the shear bonding forces of orthodontic brackets
2014, Journal of Dental SciencesCitation Excerpt :However, some difficulties still exist in terms of bracket debonding. Many methods, such as ultrasonic,2–5 electrothermal,6–8 and laser9–12 debonding techniques, were developed to overcome these problems. However, these methods still have certain disadvantages such as a rise in pulp temperature8 and the requirement of expensive equipment.
Debonding of LDSVs utilising Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation with fractional technique: an in vitro study
2023, Australian Dental JournalDebonding Protocols
2023, Debonding and Fixed Retention in Orthodontics: An Evidence-Based Clinical Guide