In fixed orthodontic treatment, brackets are orthodontic attachments bonded to the tooth enamel, and their placement and removal may affect the underlying enamel surface. Enamel degradation is a critical factor for oral health, as it reduces the mechanical strength of teeth and increases susceptibility to caries and erosion. Accurate diagnosis of enamel changes is therefore essential for the evaluation of preventive and restorative treatments. In this study, enamel degradation was investigated via two integrated methods: energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and surface roughness measurement. The experimental protocol was performed in three stages: before bracket bonding, after bracket removal, and after applying a remineralization treatment. The experimental design included a repeated-measures structure, with stage (baseline, post-debonding, post-remineralization) as the within-tooth factor and bracket type (sapphire vs. metallic) as the between-tooth factor. Given the violation of the variance homogeneity assumption, group comparisons were ultimately performed using Welch ANOVA followed by Games–Howell post hoc tests, with Bonferroni-adjusted values used for pairwise comparisons. The presence of orthodontic brackets can influence enamel mineralization because the bonding and debonding procedures modify the enamel surface microtopography. These procedures can generate microcracks and surface irregularities, which may affect mineral exchange between enamel and the surrounding environment. In our study, bracket removal led to a significant decrease in the mean atomic percentages of Ca (from 32.65% to 16.37% for sapphire) and P (from 16.35% to 8.60% for sapphire), accompanied by a sharp increase in surface roughness. After remineralization, Ca and P levels increased, while roughness decreased. However, neither the mineral content nor the surface topography fully returned to the initial values, indicating that remineralization achieved only a partial recovery of enamel integrity. These findings highlight that the integrated EDS approach and roughness analysis offer a promising descriptive framework for assessing enamel degradation and monitoring the effectiveness of remineralization therapies. The generated mathematical model provides a powerful descriptive framework for the in vitro data obtained, correlating roughness with mineral composition and treatment stage. However, such a high goodness-of-fit (R² > 0.98) should be interpreted cautiously due to the risk of overfitting. Therefore, rigorous external validation is mandatory before this model can be considered a reliable predictive tool. It also highlights the importance of enamel remineralization therapies after orthodontic treatment, but also the importance of choosing personalized treatment strategies adapted to the enamel type.

Background: Enamel surface roughness after bracket debonding is an important issue due to its impact on plaque accumulation and the potential development of carious lesions. This in vitro study aimed to assess enamel roughness after the removal of metallic and sapphire brackets and the effect of a remineralization treatment. Methods: Two hundred extracted human permanent teeth with healthy enamel were randomly distributed into two groups (n = 100) and bonded with either metallic or sapphire brackets using the same adhesive (3M™ Transbond™ XT (St. Paul, MN, USA), Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, MN, USA). The enamel surface roughness was measured before bonding, after debonding, and after remineralization using SEM and a TR200 roughness (SaluTron GmbH, Frechen, Germany) tester. The parameter Ra was used to quantify the surface roughness. One-way ANOVA, the normality test, variance homogeneity, and the Bonferroni post hoc test were used to analyze the data. Results: Debonding significantly increased the enamel surface roughness in both groups. The sapphire bracket group presented significantly higher mean Ra values post debonding (4.14 ± 0.36 µm) compared to the metallic group (2.56 ± 0.52 µm). Remineralization led to a decrease in surface roughness in both groups, though not to baseline levels. The changes were statistically significant (p < 0.01), with a power of the test of 1.0. Conclusions: The bracket material significantly affects enamel surface roughness after orthodontic debonding. Sapphire brackets produced greater surface irregularities than metallic ones. Remineralization partially reduced roughness in both groups, with the final values in the metallic group being closer to baseline levels. Crucially, these values remained far above the clinical threshold for plaque retention, highlighting the need for improved debonding techniques.