ABSTRACT
Objectives:
The aim of this in vivo study was to investigate the preventive effect of two different adhesives on enamel demineralization and compare these adhesives with a conventional one.
Materials and Methods:
Fifteen patients requiring the extraction of their first four premolars for orthodontic treatment were included in the study. One premolar was randomly selected, and an antibacterial monomer-containing and fluoride-releasing adhesive (Clearfil Protect Bond, Kuraray Medical, Okayama, Japan) was used for orthodontic bracket bonding. Another premolar was randomly selected, and a fluoride-releasing and recharging orthodontic adhesive (Opal Seal, Ultradent Products, South Jordan, Utah) was used. One premolar was assigned as a control, and a conventional adhesive (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) was used. The teeth were extracted after 8 weeks, and the demineralization areas of the 45 extracted teeth were analyzed using microcomputed tomography with software.
Results:
There was no significant difference between the white spot lesion (WSL) rates of the adhesives (P > .05). The volumes of the WSLs varied from 0 to 0.019349 mm3. Although Opal Seal showed the smallest lesion volumes, there was no significant difference in volumetric measurements of the lesions among the groups (P > .05).
Conclusions:
The findings indicated no significant differences between the preventive effects of the adhesives used in this in vivo study over 8 weeks.
Enamel demineralization around two different orthodontic bracket adhesive systems: An in vivo study
