English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background.  Bracket base design is a factor influencing shear bond strength. High shear bond strength leads to enamel crack formation during debonding. The aim of this study was to compare enamel damage variations, including the number and length of enamel cracks after debonding of two different base designs.  Methods.  Eighty-eight extracted human premolars were randomly divided into2 groups (n=44). The teeth in each group were bonded by two types of brackets with different base designs: 80-gauge mesh design versus anchor pylon design with pylons for adhesive retention. The number and length of enamel cracks before bonding and after debonding were evaluated under an optical stereomicroscope ×40 in both groups. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the number of cracks between the two groups. ANCOVA was used for comparison of crack lengths after and before debonding in each group and between the two groups.  Results.  There was a significant increase in enamel crack length and numbers in each group after debonding. There was no significant difference in enamel crack numbers after debonding between the two groups, whereas the length of enamel cracks was significantly greater in anchor pylon base design after debonding.  Conclusion.  Bracket bases with pylon design for adhesive retention caused more iatrogenic debonding damage to enamel surface.

Variations in enamel damage after debonding of two different bracket base designs: An in vitro study