Methods: The sample was composed of seven individuals submitted to extraction of 2 or 4 pre-molars for orthodontic reasons. It was used the vestibular and lingual surfaces of 16 teeth. Group 1 was composed of 16 tooth surfaces that received previous pumice prophylaxis, while group 2 was composed of 16 tooth surfaces that did not receive this procedure. Teeth were kept in saline solution until the first register of the surface roughness. The roughness graphics were obtained through trials using a surface roughness tester (Talysurf 10®, Rank Taylor Hobson, Leicester, UK). Then, teeth were acid etched with a 37% phosphoric acid for 60 seconds, rinsed with water, air dried and tested with the roughness tester again. For each surface, it was obtained a graphic printed in electric sensitive paper, corresponding to the roughness before and after the acid etching. Using the software Quantikov for images analysis, the perimeter of the graphics were measured and then it was calculated the increase of the enamel roughness after acid etching, in order to compare the results between both groups. For statistical analyses, it was used student's t-test.
Results: The mean value of the increase of roughness was of 301 µm (11.37%) in group 1 and of 214µm (8.00%) in group 2. There was not statistically significant difference in the increase of the enamel roughness between the samples with and without pumice prophylaxis (p=0,283).
Conclusions: It was concluded that the increase of the enamel roughness was not influenced by the previous pumice prophylaxis.