Evaluation of the basic surface roughness of an ISO-certified and non-ISO-certified slot bracket with an atomic force microscope

Chrisni Oktavia Jusup; Eky Setiawan Soeria Soemantri; Endah Mardiati; Ida Ayu Evangelina

doi:10.24198/pjd.vol31no2.17956

Evaluation of the basic surface roughness of an ISO-certified and non-ISO-certified slot bracket with an atomic force microscope

Chrisni Oktavia Jusup, Eky Setiawan Soeria Soemantri, Endah Mardiati, Ida Ayu Evangelina

Abstract

Introduction: The base surface roughness of slot bracket can affect friction in tooth movement. There are ISO-certified and non-ISO-certified stainless steel brackets on the market. Thus orthodontists must be careful in choosing the right bracket. This study was aimed to evaluate the differences of the surface roughness of ISO-certified and non-ISO-certified Roth 0.022 inch stainless steel bracket with the parameter of S a (average roughness). Methods: This research was a laboratory observational. Samples were taken randomly as many as 32 brackets divided into two groups, each consisted of two bracket brands. Surface roughness measurements were performed using an atomic force microscope (AFM), then the data were analysed by ANOVA test (p < 0.05) and Post-Hoc analysis. Results: The ISO-certified bracket has an S a value smaller than the non-ISO-certified bracket. There was a significant difference in the surface roughness of the ISO-certified and non-ISO-certified slot bracket base (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The ISO-certified bracket has a smoother base surface than the non-ISO-certified bracket base.

Keywords: Surface roughness, stainless steel slot bracket, atomic force microscope

Keywords

Surface roughness, stainless steel slot bracket, atomic force microscope

Full Text:

PDF

References

Mendes Bde A, Neto Ferreira RA, Pithon MM, Horta MC, Oliveira DD. Physical and chemical properties of orthodontic bracket after 12 and 24 months : in situ study. J Appl Oral Sci. 2014; 22(3): 194-203. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720130528

Agarwal CO, Vakil KK, Mahamuni A, Tekale PD, Gayake PV, Vakil JK. Evaluation of surface roughness of the bracket slot floor - a 3D perspective study. Prog Orthod. 2016; 17: 3. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0116-2

Proffit W, Fields H. Contemporary Orthodontics. 5th ed. London: Elsevier Health Science; 2013. p.329-30.

Anusavice KJ. Phillip’s science of dental material. 12th ed. St. Louis: Saunders-Elsevier; 2003. p. 406-7.

Choi SH, Kang DY, Hwang CJ. Surface roughness of three of modern plastic bracket slot floor and frictional resistance. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84(1): 177-83. DOI: 10.2319/030313-179.1

Vale F, Malo L, Caramelo F, Ramos J, Cavaleiro J. Dynamic behavior and surface characteristics of conventional and self-ligating brackets. Rev Portug Estomatol Med Dentár Cirurgia Maxilofac. 2016; 57(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.rpemd.2015.12.003

Dolci GS, Spohr AM, Zimmer ER, Marchioro EM. Assesment of the dimensions and surface characteristic of orthodontic wire and bracket slots. Dental Press J Orthod. 2013; 18(2): 69-75. DOI: 10.1590/S2176-94512013000200016

Lin MC, Lin SC, Lee TH, Huang HH. Surface Analysis and Corrosion Resistance of Different Stainless Steel Orthodontic Brackets in Artificial Saliva. Angle Orthod. 2006; 76(2): 322-329. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0322:SAACRO]2.0.C

Nanjundan K, Vimala G. Evaluation of frictional resistance and surface characteristics after immersion of orthodontic brackets and wire in different chemical solutions: A comparative in vitrostudy. Indian J Dent Res. 2016; 27(5): 513-20. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.195641

International Organization for Standardization [homepage on internet]. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization. 2017. About ISO [cited 2018]; [about 4 screens]. Available from: https://www.iso.org/about-us.html

Lee GJ, Park KH, Park YG, Park HK. A quantitative AFM analysis of nano-scale surface roughness in various orthodontic brackets. Micron. 2010; 41(7): 775-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.micron.2010.05.013

Oh KT, Choo SU, Kim KM, Kim KN. A stainless steel bracket for orthodontic application. Eur J Orthod. 2005; 27(3): 237-44. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cji005

Fidalgo TK, Pithon MM, Maciel JV, Bolognese AM. Friction between different wire bracket combinations in artificial saliva – an in vitro evaluation. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011; 19(1): 57-62. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572011000100012

Hsu JT, Yu JH, Wu LC, Chang YY, Huang HH, Huang HL. Surface Roughness and Topography of Four Commonly Used Types of Orthodontic Archwire. J Med Biol Eng. 2011; 31(5): 367-70. DOI: 10.5405/jmbe.700

Yousif AA, El-Karim UM. Microscopic study of surface roughness of four orthodontics arch wires. Tanta Dent J. 2016; 13(4): 199-207. DOI: 10.4103/1687-8574.195714

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjd.vol31no2.17956