EVALUATION OF ORTHODONTIC ADHESIVE COLOR REFLECTION DEGREES OF TRANSPARENT AND TRANSLUCENT CERAMIC BRACKETS

Abstract Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of optical characteristics of two different kinds of ceramic brackets in masking and reflecting color of four different adhesives by means of digital measurements in vitro. Material and Methods: 160 artificial maxillary central incisors were divided into two groups of 80, and assigned to monocrystalline bracket group (Group 1) and polycrystalline bracket group (Group 2). Both groups were further divided into four equal sub-groups according to the adhesives. After bonding, all samples were colorimetrically evaluated before (T0) and after (T1) thermocycling and photoaging. Values for L*, a* and b* parameters were recorded and color differences (∆E) were calculated. The results were statistically analyzed using the Kruskall–Wallis test. Evaluation among subgroups was performed using Dunn’s multiple correlation test (P<0.05). The clinical detection threshold for ∆E value was set at 3.7 units. Results: ∆E values between T0 and T1 showed an increase in all four sub-groups in the monocrystalline group and the highest value was 1.49±0.66 for the Transbond XT group. There was no significant difference in ∆E values in any adhesive sub-group in the polycrystalline group. Conclusion: Monocrystalline brackets are more likely to reflect color of orthodontic adhesives while polycrystalline brackets have a masking effect Therefore, while treating patients with more esthetic concerns, monocrystalline translucent brackets should be preferred. Key words: Orthodontics, orthodontic brackets, aluminum oxide, orthodontic adhesives, esthetics Saydam ve Yarısaydam Seramik Braketlerin Adeziv Renk Değişimini Yansıtma Miktarlarının Değerlendirilmesi Özet Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, yapısal olarak farklılık gösteren iki farklı estetik braketin optik özelliklerinin dört farklı ortodontik adezivin renk değişimlerini yansıtma veya maskeleme etkilerini dijital olarak in vitro ortamda incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: 160 adet yapay üst santral keser diş her biri 80 adet olacak şekilde monokristalin ve polikristalin braket uygulanmak üzere sırasıyla Grup 1 ve Grup 2 olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Her iki grup, kullanılan ortodontik adeziv sistemine göre dört eşit alt gruba ayrılmıştır. Braket uygulamasını takiben örnekler termal döngü ve suni gün ışığı uygulamasından önce (T0) ve sonra (T1) olmak üzere iki defa renk ölçümü işlemine tabi tutulmuştur. L*, a* ve b* parametrelerinin değerleri kaydedilip her örnek için renk farkı (∆E) hesaplanmıştır. ∆E bulguları Kruskall-Wallis testi ile, Alt gruplar ararsı değerlendirme ise Dunn’ın çoklu karşılaştırma testi ile yapılmıştır (P<0.05). Klinik olarak tespit edilebilir ∆E değeri 3.7 ünite olarak belirlenmiştir. Bulgular: Monokristalin braket grubundaki tüm alt gruplarda T0 ve T1 arasındaki ∆E değerlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir artış gözleniren, polikristalin braket grubunun alt gruplarında anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. En fazla ∆E artışı monokristalin braket grubunda Transbond için tespit edilmiştir (1.49±0.66). Sonuç: Seramik braketlerin altından yansıyan ortodontik adeziv sistemlerinin renk değişimi monokristalin braketler tarafından daha fazla yansıtılırken, polikristalline braketlerde maskeleme etkisi nedeni ile daha az olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Estetik kaygısı yüksek olan hastalarda polikristalline braketlerin tercih edilmesi düşünülmelidir. Anahtar kelimeler: Ortodonti, ortodontik braketler, alüminyum oksit, ortodontik adezivler, estetik

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Orthodontics, orthodontic brackets, aluminum oxide, orthodontic adhesives, esthetics

PDF

___

1. Birnie D. Ceramic brackets. Br J Orthod 1990; 17: 71–5.
2. Swartz ML. Ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod 1988; 22: 82-8.
3. Camporesi M, Baccetti T, Franchi L. Forces relea- sed by esthetic preadjusted appliances with low-friction and conventional elastomeric ligatures. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2007; 131: 772–5.
4. Kurt M, Kolsuz M, Öz U, Avsever İ, Örmeci̇ T, Şakul B, Orhan K. Evaluation Of Intraoral Orthodontic Brackets’ Effects On Magnetic Resonance Imaging –A Cadaveric Study At 3 Tesla. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2020; 30: 12-9.
5. Jena AK, Duggal R, Mehrotra AK. Physical properties and clinical characteristics of ceramic brackets a comprehensive review. Trends Biomater Artif Organs. 2007; 20: 101–15.
6. Karamouzos A, Athanasiou AE, Papadopoulos MA. Clinical characteristics and properties of ceramic brackets: A comprehensive review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 112: 34–40.
7. Lopes Filho H, Maia LEG, Araujo MVA, Ruellas ACO. Influence of optical properties of esthetic brackets (color, translucence, and fluorescence) on visual perception. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 141: 460-7.
8. Çeli̇k N, Sağsöz Ö, Gündoğdu M. Farkli İçeceklerin Posterior Kompozitlerin Renk Değişikliği Ve Yüzey Pürüzlülüğü Üzerine Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2017; 27: 27-33.
9. Guignone BC, Silva LK, Soares RV, Akaki E, Goiato MC, Pithon MM, Oliveira DD. Color stability of ceramic brackets immersed in potentially staining solutions. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015; 20: 32-8.
10. McLaren K. The development of the CIE 1976 (L*a*b*) uniform colour-space and colour-differen- ce formula. J Soc Dyers Colour 1976; 92: 338-41.
11. Pietrobon N, Paul SJ, Pack N. New approaches to shade communication. In: Romano R, Bichacho N, Touati B. The art of the smile: intergrading prosthodontics, orthodontics, periodontics, dental technology and plastic surgery in esthetic dental treatment. 1st ed., Quintessence Publishing Co., Ltd., Berlin, 2005, 420-1110.
12. Baltzer A, Kaufmann-Jinoian V. The determination of the tooth colors. Special Reprint. Quintessenz Zahntechnik 2004; 7: 725-40.
13. International Organization for Standardization, Dental materials: determination of colour stability of dental polymeric materials. Geneva, ISO DIN EN 27491.
14. Stober T, Gilde H, Lenz P. Color stability of highly filled composite resin materials for facings. Dent Mater 2001; 17: 87-94.
15. Sham AS, Chu FC, Chai J, Chow TW. Color stability of provisional prosthodontic materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 447-52.
16. Karadaş M, Sağsöz Ö. Influence Of Home And Office Bleaching Agents On Color And Translucency Of Composite Resins. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2019; 29: 238-43.
17. Lee YK, Lim BS, Kim CW. Difference in the color and color change of dental resin composites by the background. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32: 227-33.
18. Atlas Suntest Bulletin. Atlas material testing solutions. Corporate bulletin, Gelnhausen, Germany, 1998.
19. Maijer R, Smith DC. Corrosion of orthodontic bracket bases. Am J Orthod 1982; 81: 43-8.
20. Rinke S, Hüls A, Kettler MJ. Colorimetric analysis as a means of quality control for dental ceramic materials. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 1996; 4: 105-10.
21. Corciolani G, Vichi A, Louca C, Ferrari M. Color match of two different ceramic systems to selected shades of one shade guide. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105: 171-6.
22. Akyalcin S, Rykiss J, Rody WJ, Wiltshire WA. Digital analysis of staining properties of clear aesthetic brackets. J Orthod 2012; 39: 170-5.
23. Yu B, Lee YK. Aesthetic color performance of plastic and ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. J Orthod 2011; 38: 167-74.
24. Oliveira CB, Maia LGM, Santos-Pinto A, Gandini-Júnior LG. In vitro study of color stability of polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets. Dental Press J Orthod 2014; 19: 114-21.
25. Lee YK, Yu B. Translucency and color match with a shade guide of esthetic brackets with the aid of a spectroradiometer. Dental Press J Orthod 2016; 21: 81-7.
26. Seghi RR, Hewlett ER, Kim J. Visual and instrumental colorimetric assessments of small color differences on translucent dental porcelain. J Dent Res 1989; 68: 1760-4.
27. Trakyali G, Ozdemir FI, Arun T. Enamel colour changes at debonding and after finishing procedures using five different adhesives. Eur J Orthod 2009; 31: 397-401.