Evaluaci?n in vitro del remanente adhesivo sobre la superficie de disilicato de litio despu?s del descementado del bracket mediante el ?ndice de remanente adhesivo adaptado de Artun y Bergland (ARI) y comparaci?n de los m?todos de pulido discos sof-lex y sistema optrafine con los protocolos de acondicionamiento de ?cido fluorh?drico al 9% y ?cido fosf?rico al 35%

Abstract

[Espa?ol] Objetivo: Determinar la resina remanente mediante el ?ndice de Adhesivo Remanente (ARI) adaptado de Artun y Bergland, adem?s de comparar Discos Sof-Lex y Sistema Optrafine como m?todos de pulido posterior al descementado de brackets met?licos de premolares superiores con los protocolos de de ?cido fluorh?drico al 9% y ?cido fosf?rico al 35% en coronas de disilicato de litio. Metodolog?a: Fueron seleccionadas 14 pastillas de disilicato de litio acondicionadas con el protocolo de ?cido fosf?rico al 35% y de ?cido fluorh?drico al 9%; y montadas en una base de acr?lico autopolimerizable. Se cementaron brackets de premolares superiores y se procedi? al desalojo de los mismos con la m?quina de pruebas universales MTI-2K. Se observaron las muestras en el Estereomicroscopio y se evaluaron los distintos valores del ARI. Posteriormente, el remanente de resina fue retirado con fresa multilaminada, y las superficies se pulieron con discos Soflex y Sistema Optrafine. Luego, se colocaron las muestras en el Rugos?metro Time TR200 para medir su nivel de rugosidad pospulido. Resultados: Pudo observarse que el mayor ?ndice de ARI lo obtuvo el ?cido fluorh?drico, y el sistema Optrafine obtuvo menor rugosidad superficial, aunque sin diferencia significativa. Conclusi?n: No existe diferencia significativa en el ARI promedio de las diferentes superficies, adem?s, el protocolo de de ?cido fosf?rico present? un ?ndice de remanente adhesivo (ARI) menor en comparaci?n con el de ?cido fluorh?drico. Existe diferencia significativa en el ARI promedio de ambos ?cidos, el ARI depender? del tipo de ?cido que sea empleado. No existe diferencia significativa entre los m?todos de pulido, no obstante, se logr? una menor rugosidad superficial con el sistema de pulido Optrafine.

[English] Objective: To determine the remaining resin by means of the Remaining Adhesive Index (ARI) adapted from Artun and Bergland and to compare Sof-Lex Discs and the Optrafine System as polishing methods after debonding metal brackets of upper premolars with the protocols of 9% hydrofluoric acid and 35% phosphoric acid in lithium disilicate crowns. Methodology: 14 lithium disilicate tablets conditioned with the protocol of 35% phosphoric acid and 9% hydrofluoric acid were selected; and mounted on a self-curing acrylic base. Upper premolar brackets were cemented and they were removed with the MTI-2K universal testing machine. The samples were observed in the Stereomicroscope and the different ARI values were evaluated. Subsequently, the remainder of resin was removed with a multi-laminate bur, and the surfaces were polished with Soflex discs and the Optrafine System. Then, the samples were placed in the Roughness meter Time TR200 to measure their post-polished roughness level. Results: It could be observed that the highest ARI index was obtained by hydrofluoric acid, and the Optrafine system obtained lower surface roughness, although without significant difference. Conclusion: There is no significant difference in the average ARI of the different surfaces, in addition, the phosphoric acid protocol presented a lower adhesive remnant index (ARI) compared to that of hydrofluoric acid. There is a significant difference in the average ARI of both acids, meaning that the ARI will depend on the type of acid used. There is no significant difference between the polishing methods, however, a lower surface roughness was achieved with the Optrafine polishing system.