Comparative Evaluation of Polishing-Induced Enamel Surface Roughness: An In Vitro Study

Volume 12 , Issue 2 , August 2025 , Pages 21-30

Authors

Saz Kamal 1 ; Fadil Kareem 1

1 Pedodontic and community oral health, college of dentistry, university of Sulaimani, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq

DOI logo 10.17656/sdj.10207

Keywords

Abstract

Objective: This study was formulated to examine the effect of different polishing modalities and observing the amount of enamel surface roughness induced by each of these polishing devices.
Methods: Fifty- five bovine central incisors were used in the study. The design of the study includes 5 groups and each group contains 11 samples: Group 1 Aquacare air polisher; Group 2 Rotary and rubber cap using ACCLEAN polishing paste; Group 3 Prophy-Mate Neo; Group 4 Rotary and rubber cap using Pumice; Group 5 AIRFLOW EMS. Lastly, all the air-polishing groups were standardized by polishing the samples for 5 seconds at 90° at 4mm distance. Enamel surface roughness was measured both pre and post-polishing by profilometry and atomic force microscopy.
Results: Profilometry and atomic force microscopy readings showed that all the study groups except pumice rotary polishing group, showed statistically significant differences in intragroup comparison at p < 0.05. On the other hand, ANOVA analysis showed that only the Prophy-Mate Neo group showed statistically significant difference in inter-group comparison (p < 0.05). Regarding AFM observations in inter-group comparison, both Prophy-Mate Neo and EMS groups showed statistically significant differences compared to the study groups.
Conclusions: This in vitro study finds that of the five different polishing modalities utilized in this study, the rotary polishing technique using pumice as the polishing agent caused the least enamel surface roughness. On the other hand, Prophy-Mate Neo and Airflow EMS caused the highest levels of enamel surface roughness induction.

References

  1. Kwon T, Lamster IB, Levin L. Current concepts in the management of periodontitis. Int Dent J. 2021;71:462–476.
  2. Abdulkareem AA, Al-Taweel FB, Al-Sharqi AJB, et al. Current concepts in the pathogenesis of periodontitis: From symbiosis to dysbiosis. J Oral Microbiol. 2023;15:2197779.
  3. Janakiram C, Dye BA. A public health approach for prevention of periodontal disease. Periodontol 2000. 2020;84:202–214.
  4. Lamont T, Worthington HV, Clarkson JE, et al. Routine scale and polish for periodontal health in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;12:CD004625.
  5. Ring ME. History of dental prophylaxis. J Am Dent Assoc. 1967;75:892–895.
  6. Sawai MA, Bhardwaj A, Jafri Z, et al. Tooth polishing: The current status. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2015;19:375–380.
  7. Abdulbaqi HR, Shaikh MS, Abdulkareem AA, et al. Efficacy of erythritol powder air-polishing in active and supportive periodontal therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Dent Hyg. 2022;20:62–74.
  8. Guma E, Kiliaridis S, Scherrer SS, et al. An in vitro evaluation of the effects of air-polishing powders on sound and demineralised enamel. Materials. 2023;16:4811.
  9. Lussi A, von Tschamer V, Eakle JC. Electrochemical impedance characterization of human and bovine enamel. J Dent Res. 1990;69(12):1806–11.
  10. Nasraui SA. Effect of sterilization and storage conditions on chemical and mechanical properties of human dentine. 2019:28–33.
  11. Kharouba J, Gonoratsky A, Brosh T, et al. Effect of different etching times on pit-and-fissure sealant micro-shear bond strength to the enamel of primary teeth. Children. 2023;10:461.
  12. Guma E, Kiliaridis S, Scherrer SS, Antonarakis GS. An in vitro evaluation of the effects of air-polishing powders on sound and demineralised enamel. Materials. 2023;16(13):4811.
  13. Barnes CM, Covey D, Watanabe H, et al. An in vitro comparison of the effects of various air polishing powders on enamel and selected esthetic restorative materials. J Clin Dent. 2014;25:76–87.
  14. Ratzka P, Zaslansky P, Jost-Brinkmann PG. Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of enamel surfaces using different air-polishing powders in the orthodontic setting: An in vitro study. J Orofac Orthop. 2023;1–10.
  15. Kruse AB, Fortmeier S, Vach K, et al. Impact of air-polishing using erythritol on surface roughness and substance loss in dental hard tissue: An ex vivo study. PLoS One. 2024;19(2):e0286672.
  16. D’Onofrio M, Cazzaniga S. Tooth surface comparison after air polishing and rubber cup: A scanning electron microscopy study. J Clin Dent. 2016;27(1):13–18.
  17. Moëne R, Décaillet F. Subgingival plaque removal using a new air-polishing device. J Periodontol. 2010;81(1):79–88.
  18. West NX, Lussi A, Seong J, et al. Dentin hypersensitivity: Pain mechanisms and aetiology of exposed cervical dentin. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:9–19.
  19. Barnes C. An in-depth look at air polishing. Coll Dent Fac Publ. 2010;8(3):32, 34–36, 40.
  20. Lutz F, Imfeld T. Advances in abrasive technology—prophylaxis pastes. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2002;23(1):61–4.
  21. Newman PS, Silverwood RA, Dolby AE. The effects of an air abrasive instrument on dental hard tissues, skin and oral mucosa. Br Dent J. 1985;159(1):9–12.
  22. Janaphan K, Hill R, Gillam D. In vitro evaluation of the abrasiveness of novel bioactive glass powders on ivory dentine in air polishing procedures compared to selected reference powders. J Dent Maxillofacial Res. 2021;4(2):1–6.
  23. Huang J, Kim C, Arce N, Lawson NC. Intraoral air abrasion: A review of devices, materials, evidence, and clinical applications in restorative dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2019;40(8):508–513.
  24. Muassab G, Arana-Chavez VE, Fava M. Roughness of human enamel surface submitted to different prophylaxis methods. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008;32(4):299–303.
  25. Sigwart L, Wiesmüller V, Kapferer-Seebacher I. Colour changes and surface roughness after air-polishing for tobacco stain removal. Int Dent J. 2024;24:20–29.
  26. Salerno M, Giacomelli L, Derchi G, et al. Atomic force microscopy in vitro study of surface roughness and fractal character of a dental restoration composite after air-polishing. Biomed Eng Online. 2010;9:1–11.
  27. Sugsompian K, Tansalarak R, Piyapattamin T. Comparison of the enamel surface roughness from different polishing methods: Scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy investigation. Eur J Dent. 2020;14:299–305.
  28. Teutle-Coyotecatl B, Contreras-Bulnes R, Rodríguez-Vilchis LE, et al. Effect of surface roughness of deciduous and permanent tooth enamel on bacterial adhesion. Microorganisms. 2022;10:1701.
  29. Mei L, Guan G. Profilometry and atomic force microscopy for surface characterization. Nano TransMed. 2023;2:e9130017.
Statistics
  • Article view1137
  • Downloads15
  • First online1 August 2025
  • Published at1 August 2025

  • RIS
  • BibTeX
  • EndNote
  • Mendeley
  • APA (7th edition)
  • MLA (9th edition)
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • Vancouver