Maxillary incisor torque with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a prospective clinical trial

Clinical implementation of axial angulation of incisors in the course of routine fixed appliance treatment - a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To identify clinically relevant factors for changes in axial angulation of incisors during routine fixed appliance orthodontic treatment.

METHODS

A total of 106 patients (grades 1-2 of IOTN, 64 females, 42 males; mean age: 15.5 years) from a private practice and treated with metal or ceramic brackets were included in this retrospective cohort study. The axial angulation of the upper and lower incisors was measured on lateral cephalograms before insertion of the first rectangular 0.016 × 0.022-in NiTi archwire (T0) and at the end of treatment about 8 weeks after insertion of the working 0.019 × 0.025-in stainless steel archwire (T1). Treatment-related changes according to bracket type, initial situation, premolar extraction, angle class, and skeletal vertical configuration were analyzed.

RESULTS

Although statistically significant treatment-related changes were seen for both the upper incisors (+ 1.3°) and the lower incisors (- 5.2°), only in ten patients (9.4%) was the prescribed torque value of 17° for the upper incisors and in no patient for the lower incisors achieved. A negative association between the induced change of axial angulation of incisors and the initial values was detected for the upper incisors as well as for the lower incisors. A comparison of the angle classes revealed significant differences in incisor changes. At the end of therapy, only a slight change for the upper central incisors in patients in angle class I cases and a significantly greater change in patients with angle class II/2 was observed. Cases with premolar extraction ended with lower axial angulation of the incisor than cases without extraction. The individual analysis of possible influencing factors also revealed an association with the vertical skeletal configuration.

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time, the presented data show clinically relevant influencing factors for incisor axial angulation changes of the upper and lower incisors in relation to the torque value of the applied brackets in the course of routine clinical practice. For the orthodontist, it remains mandatory to decide whether a customized system must be individualized in order to achieve individual therapy goals.

Clinical effects with customized brackets and CAD/CAM technology: a prospective controlled study

OBJECTIVE

Nowadays, CAD/CAM technologies enrich orthodontics in several ways. While they are commonly used for diagnoses and treatment planning, they can also be applied to create individualized bracket systems. The purpose of this prospective quasi-randomized study was to evaluate the clinical efficiency of a customized bracket system and its comparison with directly bonded conventional self-ligating bracket treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Altogether 38 patients were separated into two groups, treated either with direct bonded self-ligating brackets (Damon, Ormco, USA) or with indirect bonded customized CAD/CAM brackets (Insignia™, Ormco, USA). Overall treatment time, number of treatment appointments, number of lost or repositioned brackets, number of arch wires and wire bends, Little Irregularity Index, cephalometric analyses and ABO scores were compared. Superimpositions of the virtual set-ups and the treatment results of the CAD/CAM group were performed to evaluate the clinical realization of the treatment planning.

RESULTS

No differences between both treatment groups were found concerning overall treatment time, number of appointments and number of archwire bends. Bonding failures occurred more often using the CAD/CAM system. Indirectly bonded brackets did not have to be repositioned as often as directly bonded brackets. Treatment results with both systems were similar concerning their effects on the reduction of ABO scores. The number of used archwires was higher in the CAD/CAM group. Treatment with both systems led to further proclination of the incisors. Proclination in the lower jaw was greater than proclination in the upper jaw, and there was a statistically significant difference between the two treatment systems. Comparing the treatment results with the virtual set-ups, mesial positions were met best, followed by vertical positions. Transversal positions showed the greatest discrepancies. Concerning angles, values of angulation showed greatest accordance to the virtual set-up, while values of inclinations showed greatest discrepancies.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with a direct bonded self-ligating bracket system the use of indirect bonded customized CAD/CAM brackets showed only minor influence on treatment efficiency and treatment outcomes. Transversal expansion, deep bite correction, expression of torque and anchorage loss remain challenges in the treatment with straight-wire appliances. Trial registration DRKS, DRKS00024350. Registered 15 February 2021, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00024350 .

Is there any difference between conventional, passive and active self-ligating brackets? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

To test the null hypothesis that there was no difference in treatment efficiency between therapies undertaken with conventional (CBs), passive self-ligating (PSLBs) or active self-ligating (ASLBs) brackets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed in 3 data bases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) from their origin up to January 2019. Additional references were hand searched. Search was strictly restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and split-mouth design studies (SMDs). RCTs and SMDs were initially processed separately and subsequently combined in a network meta-analysis. The following variables were evaluated: treatment duration, number of visits, occlusal outcomes, alignment rate, transverse arch dimensional changes, incisor position modification, rate of space closure, anchorage loss, bond failure, root resorption, perception of discomfort during the initial phase of alignment, time to ligate in or to untie an archwire, periodontal variables, quality of life.

RESULTS

On 229 papers, 30 RCTs and 9 SMDs were finally included in this study. Out of 85 comparisons, 16 only revealed statistically significant differences. It was quicker to untie and ligate an 0.014 NiTi arch from/in 6 ASLBs anterior ceramic brackets compared to 6 ceramic CBs. It was also more painful to insert and remove an 0.019×0.025 SS wire in/from PSLB's brackets compared to CB's attachments. Compared to conventional brackets, there was less maxillary incisor proclination with PSLBs in non-extraction cases. Moreover, there was less bleeding on probing 4-5 weeks after bonding with PSLBs compared to CBs brackets. The only significant difference between ASLBs and PSLBs was that alignment was 10 days faster with active self-ligating braces compared with passive self-ligating braces even if treatment duration between ASLBs and PSLBs was not significantly different. The network meta-analysis revealed that IMPA was greater in extractions cases with CBs compared with both ASLBs (+2,5°) and PSLBs (+1,6°).

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of the studied variables did not show any significant differences between the three types of brackets. The most significant findings were that it was quicker to insert and remove archwires from ASLBs compared to CBs, and it was more painful to insert and remove an 0.019×0.025" stainless steel wire in/from PSLBs compared to CBs. The major difference between ASLBs and PSLBs was that alignment was 10 days faster with active self-ligating braces compared with passive self-ligating braces even if treatment duration between ASLBs and PSLBs was not significantly different. Most of the claims put forward by the suppliers were not substantiated by our network meta-analysis.

Comparison of multiforce nickel-titanium wires to multistrand wires without force zones in bending and torque measurements

PURPOSE

The aim was to compare rectangular multiforce nickel-titanium (NiTi) wires to rectangular wires with only one force zone. Both types of wires are primarily intended for use during the levelling phase of orthodontic treatment. Thus, basic mechanical properties were examined by means of a three-point bending test. Torque expression, which is dependent on both wire parameters and interslot distances, was analyzed using the Orthodontic Measurement and Simulation System (OMSS).

MATERIAL/METHODS

Four multizone products were tested: DuoForce™ (Forestadent, Pforzheim, Germany), TriTanium™ (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, WI, USA), Triple Force™ (ODS, Kisdorf, Germany), Bio-Active™ (GC, Breckerfeld, Germany), and two multistrand products without force zones: a nine-strand NiTi, TurboWire™ (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) and an eight-strand stainless steel (SS) wire, Multibraid™ (GAC, Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA). All the wires had the dimension 0.40 mm × 0.56 mm (0.016 inch × 0.022 inch) except the nine-strand NiTi wire TurboWire™, which had a dimension of 0.43 mm × 0.65 mm (0.017 inch × 0.025 inch). Six different bracket systems in the 0.018 inch slot system were chosen: the conventional brackets discovery® and discovery® smart (Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany), the active self-ligating brackets InOvation™ and InOvation™ mini (GAC, Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA) and the passive self-ligating brackets Carrière™ (ODS, Kisdorf, Germany) and BioPassive® (Forestadent, Pforzheim, Germany). The first set-up was a three-point bending test according to DIN EN ISO 15841. For the second experiment, the bracket products glued on a maxilla model were combined with the wire products. The torque moments arising during torqueing of the wires between +20° and -20° were measured in three positions: first incisor, canine and second bicuspid.

RESULTS

Bending tests confirmed variation of the force corresponding to the force zones. The nine-strand NiTi wire TurboWire^TM and the eight-strand SS wire Multibraid™ did not show any variation dependent on the tested area. Torque-moments generated by the multizone wires were higher compared to the braided wires. The nine-strand NiTi wire showed the lowest moments in spite of the higher dimension. As expected, increasing the interbracket distance reduced the torque moments.

CONCLUSION

The tests verified the existence of multiple force zones in the NiTi wires for forces and moments, respectively. As the torque-moments arising from the multizone wires were rather high, it is not recommended to use these wires as a first "leveling wire" in orthodontic treatment, especially in extremely crowded cases.

Buccolingual Inclination Effects of Self-Ligating and Conventional Premolar Brackets: A Cone Beam Computed Tomography Study

Objective

This study aimed to compare the effects of passive self-ligating (PSL) and conventional ligating (CL) of brackets on the buccolingual inclination (BLINC) of the maxillary premolars.

Methods

This in vitro study included a PSL bracket group and a CL bracket group. Acrylic teeth on typodonts were aligned using 0.014-inch heat-activated nickel titanium (HANT) (T1) and 0.019×0.025-inch HANT (T2) and 0.021×0.025-inch stainless steel (SS) (T3) archwires in a sequence. Standardized cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were taken immediately after each archwire stage. The differences of premolar teeth BLINC values in the 0.019×0.025-inch and 0.014-inch HANT archwires (T2-T1) and 0.021×0.025-inch SS and 0.019×0.025-inch HANT archwires (T3-T2) were compared between PSL and CL groups. The value of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The BLINC change of the second premolar (SPM) showed a statistically significant difference (p=0.008), but the BLINC change of the first premolar (FPM) (p=0.056) between the groups showed no statistically significant difference during the T2-T1 stage. However, there were statistically significant differences between two groups in the BLINC of the FPM (p=0.032) and SPM (p=0.032) in the T3-T2 stage. The angular changes in the buccal direction in the PSL group were higher than those in the CL group.

Conclusion

The PSL upper premolar brackets used with the 0.021×0.025-inch SS archwire produced more buccal crown movement of the upper PM teeth compared with that of the CL brackets.

Torque expression by active and passive self-ligating brackets in patients with four premolar extractions: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Appropriate torque expression contributes to ideal treatment outcomes both clinically and aesthetically. Whether active and passive self-ligating brackets (SLBs) have different torque-control capability in vivo has never been reported. The purpose of present study was to explore whether there was difference in torque expression in active and passive SLBs.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

In this retrospective study, 225 patients with four first premolar extractions were enrolled. For each patient, the digital lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken before and after treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study consisted of 2 groups: 111 subjects were treated with passive SLBs (Damon Q, Ormco) and 114 subjects with active SLBs (Empower 2, American Orthodontics). Measurements to determine skeletal changes and incisor inclination were obtained from cephalometric tracings using Dolphin software (version 11.8, USA). Comparisons in both groups and intergroups were compared using t tests and chi-square test.

RESULTS

Significant differences in the variation of U1-SN(°), U1-NA(°), L1-NB(°) and L1-FH(°) were found between two groups. More labially inclined maxillary incisors were found in active SLB group, while more labially inclined mandibular incisors were observed in passive SLB group.

CONCLUSIONS

With the present prescription set in the two brackets, active SLBs achieved more proclined maxillary incisors and retroclined mandibular incisors. Clinicians should take torque expression of brackets into consideration during orthodontic treatment.

Rates of tooth movement and bone remodeling activity: Self-ligating versus conventional brackets

Background

Bracket systems have been developed with the purpose of reducing frictional resistance between the archwire and accessories. The aim of this research was to compare rates of tooth movement and regions of cellular bone modeling activity along tooth root surfaces of teeth moved with conventional vs. self-ligating brackets.

Material and Methods

The experiments were conducted in 20 male dogs. Bands were cemented in all intermediate incisors, with conventional brackets (Morelli) on the right side and hybrid self-ligating ones (T3-American Orthodontics) on the left side. A 0.019” x 0.025” stainless steel wire was inserted passively in the slot of these brackets with chain elastics (250 gf) to perform sliding mechanics. Clinical records of the orthodontic mechanics were made before and after 15 days of the tooth movement. The dental segments of the animals were prepared for light microscopy. Statistical analysis of variance and the Tukey correction with a P value at 5% were used.

Results

There were no significant differences in tooth movement rates between the two types of brackets but differences, in the bone modeling activity, suggested that tooth movement with the self-ligating brackets resulted in more tipping and less translational movement than tooth movement with the conventional brackets.

Conclusions

The rates of tooth movement were similar between the two systems. The histological evaluation of cellular bone modeling activity along tooth root surfaces showed more translation movement of teeth with the conventional brackets, and more tipping movement of teeth with self-ligating brackets.

Key words:Edgewise, histological reactions, orthodontic movement, self-ligating, brackets.

Variability of slot size in orthodontic brackets

Objective

The accuracy of the information incorporated into brackets is a determining factor for the efficacy of torque applied to teeth. The aim of this study was to compare the dimensions of a bracket's slots with the nominal values announced by the manufacturer.

Materials and methods

A total of 730 maxillary right central brackets manufactured by seven companies (Dentsply Gac, American Orthodontics, Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, GC Orthodontics, 3M Unitek, and Dentaurum) were studied. The sample included 0.018 × 0.025 and 0.022 × 0.028 in., metal and ceramic, conventional and self-ligating brackets. Images were obtained with an Olympus BX51 optical microscope. Slot dimensions were measured at the base and at the face on both mesial and distal sides using ImageJ software. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxon, sign tests, two- and three-way ANOVA, and Tukey's tests. Intraclass correlation coefficient was employed to assess the intraobserver and interobserver variability. The threshold for statistical significance was p ≤ .05.

Results

Statistical analysis showed that the slot dimensions of 90% to 97% of studied brackets were significantly different from nominal values. In general, slot size was oversized, with a face size larger than the base size. Comparison between mesial and distal sides showed that up to 45% of the brackets were significantly asymmetrical. The manufacturer had a significant effect for base and face widths (p = .0001) and for length (p = .003).

Conclusion

This study shows that a large proportion of measured brackets displays dimensional inaccuracies when compared with stated values. Clinically, the slot oversize and the divergence of slot walls cause an increase of wire-slot play, inducing a loss of torque control. Practitioners cannot fully trust the precision of used appliances and should be aware that adjustments could be needed in the finishing stages of the treatment.

A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot orthodontic bracket systems: part 2-quality of treatment

OBJECTIVE

To compare the quality of orthodontic treatment between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Eligible participants aged 12 years or over were allocated to the 0.018-inch or 0.022-inch slot MBT appliance (3M-Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA) using block randomization in groups of 10. Outcome measures included: 1. ABO cast-radiograph evaluation (CR-EVAL), 2. peer assessment rating (PAR) scores, 3. incisor inclination, and 4. patient perception using the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need aesthetic component (IOTN AC) and three validated questionnaires before, during and after treatment. Parametric tests [independent samples t-test and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)] and non-parametric tests (chi-square with Fisher's exact tests and Mann-Whitney U-test) assessed differences between groups (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Of the 187 participants randomized (1:1 ratio), 34 withdrew or were excluded (protocol deviations or poor cooperation). There were 77 patients in the 0.018-inch slot group and 76 patients in the 0.022-inch slot group (overall mean age: 19.1 years). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (P > 0.05). The mean total ABO CR-EVAL scores were 34.7 and 34.5; mean percentage PAR score reduction 74.1 per cent and 77.1 per cent; mean change for maxillary incisor inclination 2.9 degrees and 1.6 degrees and for mandibular incisor inclination 2.7 degrees and 1.4 degrees for the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch groups, respectively. Improvement in patient perception of aesthetics after treatment was statistically significant for both groups (P < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups for ABO CR-EVAL, percentage PAR score reduction, incisor inclination, and patient perception of treatment (P > 0.05). No adverse events were observed during treatment.

LIMITATIONS

It was impossible to blind clinicians or patients to allocation and oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes were not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically or clinically significant differences in the quality of occlusal outcomes, incisor inclination and patient perception of treatment between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems.

REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 March 2014, registration number: NCT02080338.

PROTOCOL

The protocol was published at DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-389.

Dental inclination with self-ligating and conventional fixed appliances, with and without rapid maxillary expansion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the labio- and buccolingual inclination of the anterior and posterior teeth in subjects treated with self-ligating and conventional fixed appliances with and without rapid maxillary expansion.

METHODS

Seventy-one subjects with Class I malocclusion were divided into three groups. Group 1 comprised 24 subjects (17 female; seven male, with a mean age of 13.94 ± 2.87 years), treated with Roth's pre-adjusted fixed appliances. Group 2 comprised 24 subjects (14 female; 10 male, with a mean age of 13.85 ± 1.83 years) treated with Rapid Maxillary Expansion followed by Roth's pre-adjusted fixed appliances. Group 3 comprised 23 patients (12 female; 11 male, with a mean age of 14.75 ± 1.34 years) treated with Damon self-ligating bracket system. Buccolingual inclination was measured on digital dental models using a 3D software. Intergroup changes comparison was performed with one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey tests.

RESULTS

The left maxillary lateral incisor showed labial inclination in the conventional and RME groups, and palatal inclination in the Damon group. The Damon group showed greater buccal inclination in most posterior mandibular teeth during treatment than the conventional and RME groups. The right mandibular canine and lateral incisor showed greater labial inclination in the Damon group than in the RME group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was greater buccal inclination of the posterior mandibular teeth and labial inclination of the right mandibular canine and lateral incisor in the Damon group.

Buccolingual Inclination Control of Upper Central Incisors of Aligners: A Comparison with Conventional and Self-Ligating Brackets

Objective

The upper incisors torque expression is essential for the orthodontic treatment accuracy. Various orthodontic devices are claimed to have different inclination control capacity. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the radiographic buccolingual inclination of upper incisors in patients treated with three different orthodontic techniques.

Material and Methods

Conventional brackets (Victory, 3M), self-ligating appliances (Damon Q, Ormco), and aligners (Invisalign, Align Technology) were tested. Cephalometric data of 25 patients with similar skeletal and dental pretreatment parameters were collected for each technique. Position changes of upper central incisors were assessed with radiographic evaluation before and after therapy. Three different parameters were considered: 11^∧SnaSnp, 11^∧Ocl and I+ TVL. All variables were measured before (T0) and after (T1) treatment and their variation over treatment was assessed.

Results

When evaluating angular measurements, 11^∧SnaSnp and 11^∧Ocl angles showed the highest numeric variation with conventional brackets. Lowest values were reported with aligners. However, the differences among various techniques were not significant for both angles (P>0.05). Also I+ TVL linear value variation did not show significant differences among the different groups tested (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Conventional multibrackets appliance showed the highest incisal position variations over treatment, but the differences among various groups were not significantly different.

Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the longitudinal stability of the conventional straight-wire system after the use of a quad-helix appliance with Damon self-ligating system in patients with Class I malocclusion.

METHODS

27 adolescent patients were evaluated at three different periods: pre-treatment (T1), post-treatment (T2) and three years post-treatment (T3). Group 1 included 12 patients (with a mean age of 14.65 year) treated with Damon 3MX bracket system; and Group 2 included 15 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 year) who underwent orthodontic treatment with Roth prescribed brackets after expansion with Quad-Helix appliance. Relapse was evaluated with dental cast examination and cephalometric radiograph tracings. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM-SPSS for Windows software, version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). A p-value smaller than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

There were significant increases in all transverse dental and postero-anterior measurements (except for UL6-ML mm in Group 1) with active treatment. There was some significant relapse in the long-term in inter-canine width in both groups and in the inter-first premolar width in Group 2 (p< 0.05). Significant decrease in all frontal measurements from T2 to T3 was seen for both groups. Upper and lower incisors significantly proclined in T1-T2 (p< 0.05), however no relapse was found for both groups. When two systems were compared, there was no significant difference for the long-term follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Conventional (quad-helix appliance with conventional brackets) and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the long-term incisor positions and transverse dimension changes of maxillary arch.

Comparative study of torque expression among active and passive self-ligating and conventional brackets

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare torque expression in active and passive self-ligating and conventional brackets.

METHODS

A total of 300 segments of stainless steel wire 0.019 x 0.025-in and six different brands of brackets (Damon 3MX, Portia, In-Ovation R, Bioquick, Roth SLI and Roth Max) were used. Torque moments were measured at 12°, 24°, 36° and 48°, using a wire torsion device associated with a universal testing machine. The data obtained were compared by analysis of variance followed by Tukey test for multiple comparisons. Regression analysis was performed by the least-squares method to generate the mathematical equation of the optimal curve for each brand of bracket.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences were observed in the expression of torque among all evaluated bracket brands in all evaluated torsions (p < 0.05). It was found that Bioquick presented the lowest torque expression in all tested torsions; in contrast, Damon 3MX bracket presented the highest torque expression up to 36° torsion.

CONCLUSIONS

The connection system between wire/bracket (active, passive self-ligating or conventional with elastic ligature) seems not to interfere in the final torque expression, the latter being probably dependent on the interaction between the wire and the bracket chosen for orthodontic mechanics.

Cone Beam Computed Tomography-based Evaluation of the Anterior Teeth Position Changes obtained by Passive Self-ligating Brackets

AIM

The objective of this study was to evaluate the anterior teeth position changes obtained by passive self-ligating brackets using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with a mean age of 16.5 years, class I malocclusion, constricted maxillary arch, and teeth crowding above 5 mm were enrolled in this study, and treated by passive orthodontic self-ligating brackets. A sequence of stainless steel thermoset wire was implemented with ending wire of 0.019" × 0.025". The CBCT and dental casts were obtained prior to the installation of orthodontic appliances (T1), and 30 days after rectangular steel wire 0.019" × 0.025" installation (T2). The measurements in CBCT were performed with the Anatomage software, and the dental casts were evaluated with a digital caliper rule with an accuracy of 0.01 mm.

RESULTS

The CBCT data demonstrated mean buccal inclination of the upper and lower central incisors ranging from 6.55° to 7.24° respectively. The upper and lower lateral incisors ranged from 4.90° to 8.72° respectively. The lower canines showed an average increase of 3.88° in the buccal inclination and 1.96 mm in the transverse intercuspal distance. The upper canines showed a negative inclination with mean average of -0.36°, and an average increase of 0.82 mm in the transverse distance, with negative correlation with the initial crowding.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with passive self-ligating brackets without obtaining spaces increases buccal inclination of the upper and lower incisors with no correlation with the amount of initial teeth crowding. The intercanine distance tends to a small increase showing different inclinations between the arches.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

When taking into account the self-ligating brackets, the amount of initial dental crowding is not a limitation factor that could increase the buccal inclination of the anterior teeth.

Torque efficiency of square and rectangular archwires into 0.018 and 0.022 in. conventional brackets

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the torque efficacy of square and rectangular wires in 0.018- and 0.022-in. conventionally ligated brackets.

METHODS

Brackets of the same prescription were evaluated in both slot dimensions. Identical acrylic resin models of the maxilla were bonded with the brackets and mounted on the Orthodontic Measurement and Simulation System. Ten 0.018 × 0.018 in., 0.018 × 0.022 in., and 0.018 × 0.025 in. stainless steel wires were evaluated in the 0.018-in. brackets and ten 0.019 × 0.019 in., 0.019 × 0.025 in., and 0.019 × 0.026 in. stainless steel wires were evaluated in the 0.022-in. brackets. A 15° buccal root torque was gradually applied to the right central incisor bracket, and the moments were recorded at this position. One-way ANOVA was applied for both bracket slot sizes along with post hoc analysis for the various archwire sizes.

RESULTS

The mean measured moments varied between 10.78 and 30.60 Nmm among the assessed wire-and-bracket combinations. Both square and rectangular archwires in the 0.018-in. bracket system exerted statistically significantly higher moments in comparison with their counterparts in the 0.022-in. bracket system. Rectangular archwires exerted statistically significantly higher moments than square archwires, both for the 0.018- and the 0.022-in. bracket system.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectangular archwires seem to be more efficient in torque exertion, especially in 0.018-in. brackets.

A comparative experimental investigation of torque capabilities induced by conventional and active, passive self-ligating brackets

INTRODUCTION

A proper selected bracket-archwire combination displays a determining factor in the efficacy of torque applied to a tooth at the final stages of an orthodontic treatment. The objective of the current study was to assess the torque capabilities of various bracket systems combined with diverse archwire materials and cross-sections.

METHODS

The study comprised of four different 0.018-inch slot orthodontic brackets: the passive and the active self-ligating 1. Swiss Nonligating Bracket (SNB) and 2. SPEED and the metallic and the plastic conventional ligating 3. Mini Mono and 4. Brilliant, respectively, and four different archwire types: stainless steel and Nitinol: 0.016×0.016 inch and 0.016×0.022 inch. A 20 degrees labial crown torque (+20 degrees) and then a 20 degrees palatal crown torque (-20 degrees) were applied gradually on the upper right central incisor. Maximum torquing moments and torque play were registered.

RESULTS

Highest torquing moments were expressed by combining SPEED® with 0.016×0.022 inch stainless steel archwire. Lowest moments, but highest torque loss were registered by inserting a 0.016×0.016 inch Nitinol archwire in conventional ligating brackets.

CONCLUSIONS

Active self-ligating system manifests the best torque effectiveness. An evident dependence of the torque expression is displayed both on the type of ligation and on the material of the archwire.

An assessment of conventional and self-ligating brackets in Class I maxillary constriction patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate two different treatment systems with regard to incisor position, transverse dimension changes in maxillary arch, changes in maxillary molar inclinations, clinical periodontal parameters, and pain intensity in patients with a Class I malocclusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventeen patients (with a mean age of 14.5 years) underwent orthodontic treatment with the Roth prescribed edgewise bracket systems after expanding the maxillary arch with a quad-helix appliance, and 16 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 years) underwent orthodontic treatment with the Damon 3MX bracket system. Each subject's lateral cephalometric and posteroanterior radiographs and dental casts were obtained at the beginning of the treatment and after debonding. In addition to these, the periodontal index and pain scores were taken.

RESULTS

Cephalometric data showed that in both treatment systems, overjet value decreased and maxillary and mandibular incisors proclined. Posteroanterior measurements demonstrated a greater increase in the maxillary molar inclination in the Damon group. Significant increase of maxillary intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths was shown in both systems. Periodontal index and pain score changes between different observation periods were the same.

CONCLUSIONS

The conventional and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the incisor position, transverse dimension changes in maxillary arch, clinical periodontal parameters, and pain intensity. The only significant difference was that the Damon system inclined the maxillary molars more buccally than the conventional group.

Self-ligating vs conventional brackets as perceived by orthodontists

OBJECTIVE

To determine if there are significant clinical differences between self-ligating brackets (SLB) and conventional brackets (CB) during orthodontic treatment, as perceived by orthodontists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was developed and distributed to evaluate how SLB compare to CB in terms of orthodontists' perceptions (n  =  430).

RESULTS

SLB were preferred during the initial stage of treatment based on the shorter adjustment appointments and faster initial treatment progress they provided (P < .0001). On the other hand, practitioners preferred CB during the finishing and detailing stages of treatment (P < .0001). CB were also preferred over SLB because they were cheaper and resulted in fewer emergency appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

The orthodontists' preference was significantly influenced by (1) the proportion of patients treated with SLB (P < .0001), (2) the number of cases it took them to become accustomed to SLB (P < .0001), and (3) the average appointment intervals associated with SLB (P < .0001).

Treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss comparisons of self-ligating and conventional brackets

OBJECTIVE

To compare the treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss among orthodontic patients treated by self-ligating brackets (SLBs) and conventional brackets (CBs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study compared 34 patients (SLB group) treated by SmartClip brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) to 35 patients (CB group) treated by conventional preadjusted Victory series brackets (3M Unitek) and ligated by stainless steel wire ligatures. Pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) lateral cephalograms were traced and analyzed using Pancherz sagittal-occlusion analysis to obtain skeletal and dental changes in the maxilla and the mandible. The dental cast models were assessed by the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index for the treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean treatment time for SLBs (19.19 months) did not show a statistically significant difference from 21.25 months of CBs; the treatment time and pretreatment PAR scores were strongly correlated. There was no difference in anchorage loss between the SLB and CB groups. There were significant dental and skeletal changes among adolescent orthodontic patients regardless of the bracket used. The lingual inclination of the mandibular incisors in the CB group was 3.62° more than in the SLB group (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment time and anchorage loss are not influenced by the type of bracket used. There are significant dental and skeletal changes among adolescent orthodontic patients regardless of the bracket used. There is significantly greater lingual inclination of mandibular incisors in the CB group than in the SLB group.

Active and passive self-ligation: a myth? Part 1: torque control

OBJECTIVE

To determine the amount of torque expressed by various self-ligating brackets and to evaluate the influence of active clip designs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Torque moments were measured for nine different bracket types in combination with a 0.019 × 0.025 inch stainless-steel archwire. All active brackets were measured in an open and a closed configuration to evaluate the influence of the self-ligating spring clip. In addition, slot dimensions were optically measured and compared to the torque expression.

RESULTS

Moments between 3.1 Nmm and 22.6 Nmm were observed at an angulation of 30° between archwire and slot. The amount of torque contributed by the spring clip of active self-ligating brackets was approximately 1 Nmm; 10 Nmm of torque was achieved with most brackets with a 20°-25° angulation between archwire and slot. The slot dimensions ranged from 0.0222 inch (0.563 mm) to 0.0241 inch (0.613 mm).

CONCLUSION

The influence of the ligature or the active or passive self-ligating mechanism is minimal, and slot dimensions are far more important for the transmission of torque. The amount of torque exerted by the active spring clip is approximately 1/10th of the torquing moments recommended in the literature.

Systematic review of self-ligating brackets

INTRODUCTION

Self-ligating brackets have been gaining popularity over the past several decades. Various advantages for these systems have been claimed. The purposes of this systematic review were to identify and review the orthodontic literature with regard to the efficiency, effectiveness, and stability of treatment with self-ligating brackets compared with conventional brackets.

METHODS

An electronic search in 4 data bases was performed from 1966 to 2009, with supplemental hand searching of the references of retrieved articles. Quality assessment of the included articles was performed. Data were extracted by using custom forms, and weighted mean differences were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 2 randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias, 10 cohort studies with moderate risk of bias, and 4 cross-sectional studies with moderate to high risk of bias. Self-ligation appears to have a significant advantage with regard to chair time, based on several cross-sectional studies. Analyses also showed a small, but statistically significant, difference in mandibular incisor proclination (1.5 degrees less in self-ligating systems). No other differences in treatment time and occlusal characteristics after treatment were found between the 2 systems. No studies on long-term stability of treatment were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite claims about the advantages of self-ligating brackets, evidence is generally lacking. Shortened chair time and slightly less incisor proclination appear to be the only significant advantages of self-ligating systems over conventional systems that are supported by the current evidence.

Torque expression in stainless steel orthodontic brackets. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quantitative effects on torque expression of varying the slot size of stainless steel orthodontic brackets and the dimension of stainless steel wire, and to analyze the limitations of the experimental methods used.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In vitro studies measuring torque expression in conventional and self-ligating stainless steel brackets with a torque-measuring device, with the use of straight stainless steel orthodontic wire without second-order mechanics and without loops, coils, or auxiliary wires, were sought through a systematic review process.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were selected. Direct comparison of different studies was limited by differences in the measuring devices used and in the parameters measured. On the basis of the selected studies, in a 0.018 inch stainless steel bracket slot, the engagement angle ranges from 31 degrees with a 0.016 x 0.016 inch stainless steel archwire to 4.6 degrees with a 0.018 x 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire. In a 0.022 inch stainless steel bracket slot, the engagement angle ranges from 18 degrees with a 0.018 x 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire to 6 degrees with a 0.021 x 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire. Active stainless steel self-ligating brackets demonstrate an engagement angle of approximately 7.5 degrees, whereas passive stainless steel self-ligating brackets show an engagement angle of approximately 14 degrees with 0.019 x 0.025 inch stainless steel wire in a 0.022 inch slot.

CONCLUSIONS

The engagement angle depends on archwire dimension and edge shape, as well as on bracket slot dimension, and is variable and larger than published theoretical values. Clinically effective torque can be achieved in a 0.022 inch bracket slot with archwire torsion of 15 to 31 degrees for active self-ligating brackets and of 23 to 35 degrees for passive self-ligating brackets with a 0.019 x 0.025 inch stainless steel wire.

Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical differences in relation to the use of self-ligating brackets in orthodontics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases were searched; no restrictions relating to publication status or language of publication were applied. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) investigating the influence of bracket type on alignment efficiency, subjective pain experience, bond failure rate, arch dimensional changes, rate of orthodontic space closure, periodontal outcomes, and root resorption were selected. Both authors were involved in study selection, validity assessment, and data extraction. Disagreements were resolved by discussion.

RESULTS

Six RCTs and 11 CCTs were identified. Meta-analysis of the influence of bracket type on subjective pain experience failed to demonstrate a significant advantage for either type of appliance. Statistical analysis of other outcomes was unfeasible because of inadequate methodological design and heterogenous designs.

CONCLUSIONS

At this stage there is insufficient high-quality evidence to support the use of self-ligating fixed orthodontic appliances over conventional appliance systems or vice versa.

Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances

INTRODUCTION

Our objective was to compare the effects of 2 preadjusted appliances on angular and linear changes of the mandibular incisors, and transverse mandibular arch dimensional changes over a minimum of 30 weeks. This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial a the Royal London Hospital, School of Dentistry, in London and the Kent and Canterbury Hospital in Canterbury, United Kingdom.

METHODS

Sixty- six consecutive patients satisfying the inclusion criteria were enrolled and randomly allocated to treatment with a self-ligating bracket system (SmartClip, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and conventional preadjusted edgewise brackets (Victory, 3M Unitek). Initial study models and cephalograms were obtained within a month of starting the trial. All subjects received treatment with the following archwire sequence: 0.016-in round, 0.017 x 0.025-in rectangular, 0.019 x 0.025-in rectangular martensitic active nickel-titanium archwires, and 0.019 x 0.025-in stainless steel archwires. Final records, including study models and a lateral cephalogram, were collected a minimum of 30 weeks after initial appliance placement. Lateral cephalograms were assessed for treatment-related changes in mandibular incisor inclination and position. Transverse dimensional changes in intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar dimensions, and the amount of crowding alleviated during the study period were assessed by comparison of pretreatment and posttreatment models. All measurements were made with a digital caliper (150 mm ISO 9001 electronic caliper, Tesa Technology, Renens, Switzerland).

RESULTS

Sixty patients completed the study. After adjustment for pretreatment values, duration of treatment, and amount of crowding alleviated during the study period, bracket type had little effect on incisor inclination (P = 0.437) and positional changes (P = 0.35), and intercanine (P = 0.967), inter-first premolar (P = 0.495), and inter-second premolar (P = 0.905) dimensions. However, the self-ligating appliance produced slightly more expansion in the molar region, a difference that was statistically significant (P = 0.009). Pretreatment values for incisor inclination (P = 0.044) and transverse dimensions (P = 0.000) affected inclination and transverse changes, respectively, with proclination less likely when the labial segment was proclined at the outset and expansion unlikely during leveling and alignment in wider arches. Greater alleviation of crowding during the study period resulted in more incisor proclination (P = 0.000) and advancement (P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

There was little difference overall in the pattern of arch alignment and leveling related to the 2 preadjusted appliances. However, there was a statistically greater increase in intermolar width in the group treated with the self-ligating appliance, although the difference was only 0.91 mm.

Alignment efficiency of Damon3 self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems: a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of mandibular tooth alignment and the clinical effectiveness of a self-ligating and a conventional preadjusted edgewise orthodontic bracket system.

METHODS

A multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 2 orthodontic clinics. Sixty-two subjects (32 male, 30 female; mean age, 16.27 years) with mandibular incisor irregularities of 5 to 12 mm and a prescribed extraction pattern including the mandibular first premolars were randomly allocated to treatment with Damon3 self-ligating (Ormco, Glendora, Calif) or Synthesis (Ormco) conventionally ligated brackets. Fully ligated 0.014-in nickel-titanium archwires were used first in both groups, followed by a sequence of 0.014 x 0.025-in and 0.018 x 0.025-in nickel-titanium, and 0.019 x 0.025-in stainless steel. Study casts were taken at the start of treatment (T1), the first archwire change (T2), and the placement of the final 0.019 x 0.025-in archwire (T3). Cephalometric lateral skull and long-cone periapical radiographs of the mandibular incisors were taken at T1 and T3.

RESULTS

No significant difference was noted (P >0.05) in initial rate of alignment for either bracket system. Initial irregularity influenced subsequent rate of movement, but sex, age, and appliance type were statistically insignificant. Alignment was associated with an increase in intercanine width, a reduction in arch length, and proclination of the mandibular incisors for both appliances, but the differences were not significant. Incisor root resorption was not clinically significant and did not differ between systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Damon3 self-ligating brackets are no more efficient than conventional ligated preadjusted brackets during tooth alignment.

Torque expression of self-ligating brackets compared with conventional metallic, ceramic, and plastic brackets

The purpose of this research was to investigate the torque capacity of active and passive self-ligating brackets compared with metallic, ceramic, and polycarbonate edgewise brackets. Six types of orthodontic brackets were included in the study: the self-ligating Speed and Damon2, the stainless steel (SS), Ultratrimm and Discovery, the ceramic bracket, Fascination 2, and the polycarbonate bracket, Brillant. All brackets had a 0.022-inch slot size and were torqued with 0.019 x 0.025-inch SS archwires. For this purpose, the labial crown torque of an upper central incisor was measured in a simulated intraoral clinical situation using the orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS). A torque of 20 degrees was applied and the correction of the misalignement was simulated experimentally with the OMSS. Each bracket/wire combination was measured five times. Maximum torquing moments and torque loss were determined. The results were analysed with one-way analysis of variance, with the bracket serving as the sole discriminating variable, and the Tukey test at the 0.05 level of significance. The ceramic bracket (Fascination 2) presented the highest torquing moment (35 Nmm) and, together with a SS bracket, the lowest torque loss (4.6 degrees). Self-ligating, polycarbonate, and selective metallic brackets demonstrated almost a 7-fold decreased moment developed during insertion of a 0.019 x 0.022-inch SS wire into a 0.022-inch slot and a 100 per cent increase in loss.