Surface roughness analysis of ceramic bracket slots using atomic force microscope

Ki-Ho Park; Hyun-Joo Yoon; Su-Jung Kim; Gi-Ja Lee; Hun-Kuk Park; Young-Guk Park

doi:10.4041/kjod.2010.40.5.294

Journal List > Korean J Orthod > v.40(5) > 1043635

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Park, Yoon, Kim, Lee, Park, and Park: Surface roughness analysis of ceramic bracket slots using atomic force microscope

Original Article

Korean Journal of Orthodontics

Korean Journal of Orthodontics 2010; 40(5): 294-303.

Published online: 31 October 2010

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2010.40.5.294

Surface roughness analysis of ceramic bracket slots using atomic force microscope

Ki-Ho Park, DMD, MSD, PhD^a, Hyun-Joo Yoon, DMD^a, Su-Jung Kim, DMD, MSD, PhD^b, Gi-Ja Lee, BS, MS, PhD^c, Hun-Kuk Park, MD, MMS, PhD^d, Young-Guk Park, DMD, MSD, PhD^e

^aClinical Instructor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea.

^bAssistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea.

^cChief Researcher, Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine, Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea.

^dProfessor, Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine, Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea.

^eProfessor, Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea.

Corresponding author: Young-Guk Park. Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kyunghee University, 1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 130-702, Korea. +82 2 958 9392; ygpark@khu.ac.kr.

Received 17 February 2010 Revised 24 June 2010 Accepted 30 June 2010

Abstract

Objective

This study was designed to measure the surface roughness at the slot floor of various ceramic brackets.

Methods

One kind of stainless steel bracket (Succes®), two kinds of monocrystalline brackets (Inspire Ice®, Perfect®) and two kinds of polycrystalline brackets (Crystalline V®, Invu®) were examined. Atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to measure the surface roughness of each bracket. Data acquisition and processing were performed using SPIP™.

Results

The differences in values of Sa, Sq, and Sz in Invu® and Inspire Ice® were not statistically different from the control group Succes®. The values of Sa, Sq, and Sz of Perfect® and Crystalline V® were greater than those of Succes®. Differences of all the Sa, Sq, and Sz values between Perfect® and Crystalline V® were not statistically significant.

Conclusions

It is concluded that the slot surfaces of Succes®, Inspire Ice®, and Invu® were smooth compared to those of Crystalline V® and Perfect®.

Keywords: AFM, Surface roughness, Bracket slot

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

A schematic view of atomic force microscopy imaging systems.20

Fig. 2

Control group (A) and experimental groups (B - E). A, Succes® (Tomy); B, Inspire Ice® (Ormco); C, Perfect® (Hubit); D, Crystalline V® (Tomy); E, Invu® (TP Orthodontics).

Fig. 3

Direction of grinding. Bracket wings were grinded to open slot base.

Fig. 4

Atomic force microscope (Nanostation II™).

Fig. 5

Optical microscopic images of several brackets (×500). A, Succes®; B, Inspire Ice®; C, Perfect®; D, Crystalline V®; E, Invu®.

Fig. 6

Three-dimensional topographic images of control group (A) and experimental groups (B - E). A, Succes®; B, Inspire Ice®; C, Perfect®; D, Crystalline V®; E, Invu®.

Table 1

Sa extracted from each surface of bracket slot using scanning probe image processor (n = 36)

^a,bGroups with different letters were significantly different from each other at the level of p < 0.05.

Table 2

Sq and Sz extracted from each surface of bracket slot using scanning probe image processor (n = 36)

^a,b,c,dGroups with different letters were significantly different from each other at the level of p < 0.05.

References

1. Angolkar PV, Kapila S, Duncanson MG Jr, Nanda RS. Evaluation of friction between ceramic brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990. 98:499–506.

2. Pratten DH, Popli K, Germane N, Gunsolley JC. Frictional resistance of ceramic and stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990. 98:398–403.

3. Sung HM, Park YC. Comparison of the frictional resistance between orthodontic bracket & archwire. Korean J Orthod. 1991. 21:543–559.

4. Riley JL, Garrett SG, Moon PC. Frictional forces of ligated plastic and metal edgewise brackets. J Dent Res. 1979. 58:A21.

5. Drescher D, Bourauel C, Schumacher HA. Frictional forces between bracket and arch wire. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989. 96:397–404.

6. Kusy RP, Whitley JQ, Mayhew MJ, Buckthal JE. Surface roughness of orthodontic archwires via laser spectroscopy. Angle Orthod. 1988. 58:33–45.

7. Sims AP, Waters NE, Birnie DJ, Pethybridge RJ. A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement in vitro using two self-ligating brackets and a pre-adjusted bracket employing two types of ligation. Eur J Orthod. 1993. 15:377–385.

8. Omana HM, Moor RN, Bagby MD. Frictional properties of metal and ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod. 1992. 26:425–432.

9. Dowling PA, Jones WB, Lagerstrom L, Sandham JA. An investigation into the behavioral characteristics of orthodontic elastomeric modules. Br J Orthod. 1998. 25:197–202.

10. Bednar JR, Gruendeman GW, Sandrik JL. A comparative study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and arch wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991. 100:513–522.

11. Saunders CR, Kusy RP. Surface topography and frictional characteristics of ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994. 106:76–87.

12. Zinelis S, Eliades T, Eliades G, Makou M, Silikas N. Comparative assessment of the roughness, hardness, and wear resistance of aesthetic bracket materials. Dent Mater. 2005. 21:890–894.

13. Horton CB, Paulus HM, Pelleu GB, Rudolph JJ. An evaluation of commercial pastes for finishing composite resin surfaces. J Prosthet Dent. 1977. 37:674–679.

14. Roulet JF, Roulet-Mehrens TK. The surface roughness of restorative materials and dental tissues after polishing with prophylaxis and polishing pastes. J Periodontol. 1982. 53:257–266.

15. Cassinelli C, Morra M. Atomic force microscopy studies of the interaction of a dentin adhesive with tooth hard tissue. J Biomed Mater Res. 1994. 28:1427–1431.

16. Marshall GW Jr, Balooch M, Tench RJ, Kinney JH, Marshall SJ. Atomic force microscopy of acid effects on dentin. Dent Mater. 1993. 9:265–268.

17. Marshall GW Jr, Balooch M, Kinney JH, Marshall SJ. Atomic force microscopy of conditioning agents on dentin. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995. 29:1381–1387.

18. Park HK. Atomic microscopy in kidney research. The 5th Congress of nephrology. 2007. 11. Kyunghee Univ;127–132.

19. Park WQ. A study on surface roughness of metals after finishing and polishing - an atomic force microscope study. 1998. A master's thesis Kyunghee Univ.

20. Jalili N, Laxminarayana K. A review of atomic force microscopy imaging systems: application to molecular metrology and biological sciences. Mechatronics. 2004. 14:907–945.

21. Widu F, Drescher D, Junker R, Bourauel C. Corrosion and biocompatibility of orthodontic wires. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1999. 10:275–281.

22. Huang HH. Variation in surface topography of different NiTi orthodontic archwires in various commercial fluoride-containing environments. Dent Mater. 2007. 23:24–33.

23. Bourauel C, Fries T, Drescher D, Plietsch R. Surface roughness of orthodontic wires via atomic force microscopy, laser specular reflectance, and profilometry. Eur J Orthod. 1998. 20:79–92.

24. 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. 76:322–329.

25. Kim HS, Woo JH. A study on surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing - an atomic force microscope study. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 1997. 35:719–741.

26. Valois CR, Silva LP, Azebedo RB. Atomic force microscopy study of stainless-steel and nickel-titanium files. J Endod. 2005. 31:882–885.

27. Lamolle SF, Monjo M, Lyngstadaas SP, Ellingsen JE, Haugen HJ. Titanium implant surface modification by cathodic reduction in hydrofluoric acid: surface characterization and in vivo performance. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009. 88:581–588.

28. El Feninat F, Ellis TH, Sacher E, Stangel I. A tapping mode AFM study of collapse and denaturation in dentinal collagen. Dent Mater. 2001. 17:284–288.

29. Freitas A, Espejo LC, Botta SB, Teixeira FS, Luz MA, Garone-Netto N, et al. AFM analysis of bleaching effects on dental enamel microtopography. Appl Surf Sci. 2010. 256:2915–2919.

30. Graber TM. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 2000. 3th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier;330–332.

31. Birnie D. Ceramic brackets. Br J Orthod. 1990. 17:71–75.

32. Fox NA, McCabe JF. An easily removable ceramic bracket? Br J Orthod. 1992. 19:305–309.

33. Swartz ML. Ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod. 1988. 22:82–88.

34. Gwinnett AJ. A comparison of shear bond strengths of metal and ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988. 93:346–348.

35. Phillips HW. The advent of ceramics. J Clin Orthod. 1988. 22:69–70.

36. Russell JS. Aesthetic orthodontic brackets. J Orthod. 2005. 32:146–163.

37. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. 2000. St Louis: Mosby;385–416.

38. Kusy RP. Morphology of polycrystalline alumina brackets and its relationship to fracture toughness and strength. Angle Orthod. 1988. 58:197–203.

39. Je YJ, Chang MH, Lim YK, Lee DY. Evaluation of friction of esthetic brackets according to different bracket-wire angulations. Korean J Orthod. 2007. 37:341–350.

TOOLS

Similar articles