0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Detection Methods Environmental Sources Human Health Effects Marine & Wildlife Nanoplastics Sign in to save

Detection and Identification of Various Microplastics in Different Orthodontic Adhesives

Cureus 2024 10 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 60 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Anjusha Divakar, Sivakamavalli Jeyachandran Shantha Sundari, Shantha Sundari, Shantha Sundari, Shantha Sundari, Shantha Sundari, Sivakamavalli Jeyachandran Sivakamavalli Jeyachandran Sivakamavalli Jeyachandran

Summary

Researchers found microplastics in four different brands of orthodontic adhesives used by dentists to attach braces. The microplastics were identified as fibers, fragments, and pellets containing various plastic polymers. While the amount is small compared to other plastic pollution sources, this study shows that dental materials can introduce microplastic particles into patients' mouths and eventually into the environment.

Background Microplastics are acknowledged as significant environmental contaminants. The clinical use of dental materials, particularly adhesives containing plastic polymers, can give rise to the production of plastic micro- and nanoparticles, which subsequently find their way into the environment. The aim of the study was to detect different microplastics and identify them in various orthodontic adhesives. Materials and methods Four different light cure orthodontic adhesives, including Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA), Ormco Enlight (Ormco, Orange, CA), Orthofix SPA (Orthofix, Verona, Italy), and Aqualine LC (Tomy International Inc, Tokyo, Japan), were collected and placed in separate Eppendorf tubes. Microplastics present in each adhesive were identified using scanning electron microscopy. Subsequently, each specimen was suspended in hydrogen peroxide, placed within a shaking incubator, and analyzed using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) to identify the type of polymer. Results The scanning electron microscope shows the surface morphology and the most predominant types of microplastics identified were fibers, fragments, and pellets. FTIR results showed the presence of several major functional groups, including hydroxyl, amine, ester, fluoro, and halo groups. Conclusion When contrasted with the quantity of microplastic waste generated by other sectors like the textile, cosmetic, and fishing industries, the microparticulate waste stemming from dental adhesives has a minimal effect on environmental deterioration. Strategies for addressing this concern should give precedence to reducing the use of these materials and adopting effective recovery methods, which could potentially involve recycling processes.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper