Primary study · included by 1 review

Effects of adhesive flash-free brackets on enamel demineralization and periodontal status.

Tan et al. 2020 · Tan Ayten, Çokakoğlu Serpil · The Angle orthodontist · 2020

PubMed 33378441 doi:10.2319/80819-518.1Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Trial PICO

Not extracted yet. Trial-level population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and design will appear here after the trial extraction run. Until then, the reviews below describe the study.

Results

Not extracted yet. Per-trial results (events, means, effect and weight as each review's forest plot reports them) will appear here after the trial extraction run.

Included by

Can Orthodontic Adhesive Systems Inhibit the Formation and Development of White Spot Lesions During Fixed Orthodontic Treatment? A Systematic Review.

Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2024 · cited as Tan et al. 2020 · Table 1 (Tan 2020); Reference 36

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
White spot lesion incidence Self-etch primer bonding system (3M Transbond Plus) vs Conventional three-step bonding system (3M Transbond XT) · 2 and 4 months after treatment start	Group 2 (3M Transbond Plus) had a significantly higher incidence of WSLs than Group 1 (3M Transbond XT) (p <0.05).	1 study · 75 participants	Ungraded
Enamel demineralization / white spot lesions (DIAGNOdent, QLF) Adhesive precoated (APC) flash-free brackets (minimal excess adhesive) vs Conventional brackets (conventional adhesive-coated / ceramic brackets) · 1 to 6 months (to debonding)	Two studies (Tan 2020 split-mouth, n=30; Yetkiner 2019 RCT, n=50): no statistically significant difference in demineralization between flash-free and conventional/APC brackets (Tan p>0.05; Yetkiner delta-F not…	2 studies · 80 participants	Ungraded

1 including review in total.