4.3 Article

Evaluation of the effects of 2 different adhesive-coated bracket systems on white spot lesion formation

Journal

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2023.06.020

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the effects of two different adhesive-precoated bracket systems on white spot lesions (WSLs), and found that there was no difference in effectiveness between FF and conventional brackets in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. However, the use of FF brackets significantly shortened the bonding time.
Introduction: This study evaluated the effects of 2 different adhesive-precoated (APC) bracket systems on white spot lesions (WSLs). Methods: The study had a split-mouth design, and 34 patients were included. The APC Flash-Free (FF) and APC II system brackets were used. At the end of the treatment, digital photographs of each tooth were taken, the WSLs were scored, and lesion areas were calculated. In the same session, the mineralization level of the teeth was measured by DIAGNOdent. The 2 bracket systems were compared in terms of bonding time. Results: There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding the number of WSLs or the size of the lesion areas. In the maxillary arch, 55.3% of the teeth in the FF group and 61.2% in the control group were healthy. In the mandibular arch, no lesions occurred in 61.2% of the teeth in the FF group and 64.7% of the control group. In the evaluation of DIAGNOdent measurements, WSL formation was detected in 3 teeth in the FF group and 4 in the control group. No statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups. There was a significant difference between the 2 groups in the evaluation of bonding times. Conclusions: The effects did not differ between FF and conventional brackets in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. The use of FF brackets significantly shortened the bonding time. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available