BACKGROUND: enamel demineralization is a common side effect of orthodontic therapy with fixed braces. The aim of the present in vitro study was to compare a conventional adhesive system and a modern adhesive system (APC Flash-Free [FF] technology) with regard to the demineralization of enamel by Streptococcus sobrinus (S. sobrinus).
METHODS: this in vitro study included premolar teeth and compared APC FF adhesive brackets (Group A, n = 15) with conventional adhesive brackets (Group B, n = 15) from the same company. Specimens were incubated with a positive control group (PCG, n = 5) and a negative control group (NCG, n = 5) in an S. sobrinus suspension for three weeks. To evaluate the grade of enamel demineralization, the samples were analyzed using a polarizing microscope.
RESULTS: the test specimens of group B with conventionally bonded bracket adhesive showed significantly greater (+10.8 μm) demineralization with regard to the penetration depth of the demineralization than the PCG (p = 0.012). Thus, there was a difference from group A with the new bracket adhesive of the FF brackets (+7.29 μm). Significantly, demineralization was more pronounced cervically than coronally in both groups, and it occurred cervically more frequently than grade 3 demineralization (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: it seems plausible that new orthodontic bracket adhesives and the modern FF adhesive system positively contribute to the reduction in enamel demineralization during orthodontic treatment.

OBJECTIVE: White spot lesions are one of the most common side effects of orthodontic therapy with a multibracket appliance and may indicate a preliminary stage of caries, also known as initial caries. Several approaches may be utilized to prevent these lesions, such as reducing bacterial adhesion in the area surrounding the bracket. This bacterial colonization can be adversely affected by a number of local characteristics. In this context, the effects of excess dental adhesive in the bracket periphery were investigated by comparing a conventional bracket system with the APC flash-free bracket system.
METHODS: Both bracket systems were applied to 24 extracted human premolars, and bacterial adhesion with Streptoccocus sobrinus (S. sobrinus) was performed for 24 h, 48 h, 7 d, and 14 d. After incubation, bacterial colonization was examined in specific areas by electron microscopy.
RESULTS: Overall, significantly fewer bacterial colonies were found in the adhesive area around the APC flash-free brackets (n = 507 ± 13 bacteria) than the conventionally bonded bracket systems (n = 850 ± 56 bacteria). This is a significant difference (**p = 0.004). However, APC flash-free brackets tend to create marginal gaps with more bacterial adhesion in this area than conventional bracket systems (n = 265 ± 31 bacteria). This bacterial accumulation in the marginal-gap area is also significant (*p = 0.029).
CONCLUSIONS: A smooth adhesive surface with minimal adhesive excess is beneficial for reducing bacterial adhesion but also poses a risk of marginal gap formation with subsequent bacterial colonization, which can potentially trigger carious lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: To reduce bacterial adhesion, the APC flash-free bracket adhesive system with low adhesive excess might be beneficial. APC flash-free brackets reduce the bacterial colonization in the bracket environment. A lower number of bacteria can minimize white spot lesions in the bracket environment. APC flash-free brackets tend to form marginal gaps between the bracket adhesive and the tooth.