Orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional edgewise twin brackets: a prospective randomized clinical trial

Incisors' bone height and inclination changes after orthodontic treatment with a self-ligating passive system

Background

This study aimed to evaluate changes in the alveolar buccal bone height of maxillary and mandibular incisors after orthodontic treatment with a self-ligating passive system and to assess the correlation between bone height and incisor inclination.

Material and Methods

Pre (T1) and post-treatment (T2) cone-beam computed tomography images of patients treated with the Damon 3MX appliance system were measured to quantify the alveolar buccal bone height of the maxillary incisors. The incisor's inclination was measured in digital models. Paired t-test was used to evaluate the changes between T1 and T2, and Pearson's coefficient was used to test the correlation.

Results

All teeth presented statistically significant alveolar buccal bone loss at T2. A statistically significant buccal inclination was observed only for the lower left lateral incisors. There was no correlation between bone height changes and incisor inclination.

Conclusions

Orthodontic treatment with a self-ligating passive system showed changes in alveolar height, but these changes were not correlated with incisor inclination. Key words:Passive self-ligating brackets, orthodontics, corrective, treatment outcome, alveolar bone loss.

Reducing Friction in Orthodontic Brackets: A Matter of Material or Type of Ligation Selection? In-Vitro Comparative Study

(1) Background: Orthodontic appliances have changed and improved with the increasing demand for orthodontic treatment of the general population. Patients desire for shorter orthodontic treatments and for the wearing of more aesthetic devices has led to the technological development of orthodontic brackets; these were manufactured from aesthetic materials (ceramics, composite polymers) and presented different designs regarding the way archwires are ligated to the bracket. The aim of this study was to determine whether there were any differences between the static frictional forces generated by stainless steel (metallic) and polycrystalline alumina (ceramics) conventional and self-ligating brackets. (2) Methods: Static friction assessment was carried out in vitro with a universal testing machine, HV-500N-S (Schmidt Control Instruments, Hans Schmidt & Co. GmbH), intended for measuring compression and traction forces. (3) Results: The study revealed significant differences in static frictional forces at the bracket-archwire interface between the tested brackets. Stainless steel brackets produced lower static friction forces than polycrystalline alumina and self-ligating brackets generally produced lower static frictional forces than conventional brackets. The reduction of frictional forces was noticeable in the first stages of treatment, when thin, flexible orthodontic archwires (0.016” NiTi) are used. Engaged with large rectangular stainless steel archwires, (0.019 × 0.025” SS), the frictional forces produced by conventional and self-ligating metal brackets were similar, no significant differences being observed between the two types of metallic design. However, in the case of tested ceramic brackets, the results showed that the self-ligating type allows a reduction in frictional forces even in advanced stages of treatment compared to conventionally ligation. (4) Conclusions: From the perspective of an orthodontic system with low frictional forces, metal brackets are preferable to aesthetic ones, and self-ligating ceramic brackets are preferable to conventional ceramic brackets.

Root resorption in relation to a modified piezocision technique

Objectives

To evaluate root resorption of lower incisors and canines quantitatively in a group of patients who underwent orthodontic treatment with piezocision and/or a collagen reinforcement technique with a fully resorbable three-dimensional (3D) collagen xenograft matrix compared with a control group.

Materials and Methods

The study sample of this secondary analysis consisted of 32 periodontally healthy patients with angle Class I malocclusion or mild Class II or III malocclusion and moderate irregularity index scores who underwent orthodontic treatment and had before (T0) and after treatment (T1) cone-beam computed tomography scans. Root resorption of lower incisors and canines was assessed quantitatively in the following four groups: the control group received orthodontic treatment without piezocision, experimental group 1 received orthodontic treatment with piezocision, experimental group 2 received orthodontic treatment with piezocision and a 3D collagen matrix, and experimental group 3 received orthodontic treatment with a 3D collagen matrix.

Results

An overall statistically significant decrease in root length from T0 to T1 for all groups was observed (P < .05). However, there was no significant difference among the groups in the amount of root length decrease from T0 to T1.

Conclusions

Orthodontic treatment combined with piezocision does not increase the risk of root resorption of lower incisors and canines when compared with orthodontic treatment without acceleration techniques. More studies with larger samples should be undertaken to confirm these results.

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.

Stability of occlusal outcome during long-term retention: the time-dependent variation of the American Board of Orthodontics index

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess long-term occlusal changes at debond and a median of 8 years afterwards (in retention) with the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) objective grading system and identify risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Fifty patients (median age: 14.3 years at debond; 60% female) treated with fixed appliances (25 with and 25 without premolar extractions) were included. The occlusal outcome was assessed with the ABO tool and analyzed statistically at 5%.

RESULTS

Extraction treatment was associated with better occlusal outcome than non-extraction treatment (34.2 versus 40.9 points; P = 0.009). In retention, ABO scores improved by 7.4 points, while patients with worse debond finishing improved more afterwards (P = 0.001). Alignment/rotations deteriorated in 58% of the cases and occlusal relationships in 38% of the cases. Marginal ridges improved more for extraction than non-extraction patients (28% versus 0%; P = 0.001). Occlusal relationships improved more for cases that 'passed' the ABO requirements at debond than failed cases (64% versus 28%; P = 0.02). Furthermore, patients with worse debond ABO scores were more likely to deteriorate at alignment/rotations in retention. Finally, the proportion of cases passing the ABO requirements improved considerably between debond (28%) and in retention (54%) as half (47%) of the cases that had failed the ABO requirements at debond passed them in retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable long-term occlusal changes are seen post-debond, which mostly favour improved settling. Extraction treatment and higher finishing quality at debond significantly influenced the chance for improvement. However, setting a cut-off score to denote treatment excellence showed considerable instability through time.

The Influence of Friction on Design of the Type of Bracket and Its Relation to OHRQoL in Patients Who Use Multi-Bracket Appliances: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background and objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of friction on design of the type of bracket, patients’ perception of pain and the impact on their oral health-related quality of life. Materials and Methods: A randomized clinical trial was carried out with 90 patients (62.2% women and 37.8% men) with three kinds of fixed multi-bracket appliances: Conventional (GC), fixed multi-bracket low friction (GS) and self-ligating (GA). The VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) was used to determine pain during the first seven days of treatment at different points in time. The patients were also given the OHIP-14 (Oral Health Impact Profile) questionnaire to analyse their oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) after the first 30 days of treatment. The ANOVA test was used for the analysis of the variables and the post hoc Bonferroni test for the comparison between groups. Results: Maximum pain was observed between one and two days after the start of treatment. The GC group showed the greatest degree of pain, with maximum values (4.5 ± 2.0) at 24 h. The self-ligation brackets show lower impact on patients’ oral health-related quality of life (0.8 ± 2.2, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Friction in the type of bracket influences pain and the Oral Health-Related Quality of Life of patients who use multi-bracket fixed orthodontics.

Outcomes of clear aligner treatment with and without Dental Monitoring: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The effects of Invisalign clear aligner treatment with and without Dental Monitoring (DM) were compared for treatment duration, number of appointments, refinements and refinement aligners, and accuracy of Invisalign in achieving predicted tooth positions (aligner tracking). The null hypothesis was that there are no differences between Invisalign with and without DM in these parameters.

METHODS

A sample of 90 consecutively treated Invisalign patients (45 control, 45 DM) fitted the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Treatment duration, number of refinements, number of refinement aligners, time to first refinement, number of appointments, number of emergency visits, and accuracy of predicted tooth movement were observed for differences.

RESULTS

The 2 groups were homogeneous (P >0.05) for sample size, age, gender, Angle classification, maxillary and mandibular irregularity index, and the number of initial aligners. There was a significant (P = 0.001) reduction in the number of appointments by 3.5 visits (33.1%) in the DM group. There was also a significant (P = 0.001) reduction in the time to the first refinement (1.7 months) in the DM group. Compared with Invisalign predicted tooth positions, actual tooth positions were statistically (P <0.05) more accurate for the DM group for the maxillary anterior dentition in rotational movements and mandibular anterior dentition for buccal-lingual linear movement. Invisalign therapy without DM was closer to predicted tooth positions for the maxillary posterior dentition for the tip. None of these differences surpassed the clinically significant thresholds (>0.5 mm or >2°); however, the DM group achieved this in 1.7 fewer months.

CONCLUSIONS

DM with Invisalign therapy resulted in a reduced number of appointments by 3.5 visits (33.1%). The DM group also achieved a clinically similar accuracy in obtaining predicted tooth movements compared with the control group in 1.7 fewer months, indicating improved aligner tracking in the DM group.

Cinco tópicos tecnológicos na ortodontia atual

O artigo explorou cinco tópicos de interesse na ortodontia considerados na realidade clínica da especialidade. Muitas vezes com o apelo comercial, marketing, mídias sociais e até mesmo em eventos científicos, ortodontistas são instigados a absorverem novas tecnologias como se fossem indispensáveis para o sucesso clínico e que seriam vistos como retrógrados se não adotarem as novas práticas. O objetivo deste trabalho foi elucidar os temas mini-implantes ortodônticos, tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico, bráquetes autoligados, scanner intraoral e alinhadores transparentes e mostrar que toda tecnologia deve ser vista com critério e estudada antes de ser adotada indiscriminadamente. A finalidade do tratamento ortodôntico deve ser pela melhor solução possível para a realidade do paciente, através de treinamento, discernimento e empenho do profissional. E isto só pode ser alcançado com estudo, educação e individualização de cada caso clínico.

Effects of High Frequency Acceleration Device on Aligner Treatment-A Pilot Study

Evaluation of the effect of a high frequency acceleration device (HFA) on clear aligner exchange intervals and treatment time required to achieve prescribed tooth movements. Sixteen subjects with similar Class I malocclusions, ≤5 mm crowding, and treated with aligner orthodontic therapy (Invisalign) were divided into two groups. Group 1 (experimental; n = 8) underwent aligner treatment in conjunction with daily use of the HFA device and exchanged aligners every five days. Group 2 (controls; n = 8) underwent aligner treatment without use of the device and exchanged aligners every 14 days according to the manufacturer’s recommended interval. All subjects were treated by one investigator, and results—total number of aligners used, and number of refinements required—were evaluated by both prior to final mobile retention (Vivera) scan. A significant decrease in both treatment time and number of aligners required to complete treatment was observed by HFA subjects vs. controls. In addition, no refinements were required by HFA subjects, whereas six of eight control subjects required one or more refinements. The results of the present preliminary report showed that the use of the HFA device in conjunction with aligner orthodontic treatment resulted in a significant decrease in the length of treatment. Moreover, the number of patients requiring refining treatment was significantly lower.

Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Prominent upper front teeth are a common problem affecting about a quarter of 12-year-old children in the UK. The condition develops when permanent teeth erupt. These teeth are more likely to be injured and their appearance can cause significant distress. Children are often referred to an orthodontist for treatment with dental braces to reduce the prominence of their teeth. If a child is referred at a young age, the orthodontist is faced with the dilemma of whether to treat the patient early or to wait and provide treatment in adolescence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth initiated when children are seven to 11 years old ('early treatment' in two phases) compared to in adolescence at around 12 to 16 years old ('late treatment' in one phase); to assess the effects of late treatment compared to no treatment; and to assess the effects of different types of orthodontic braces.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 27 September 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 8), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 27 September 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 27 September 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of orthodontic treatments to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents. We included trials that compared early treatment in children (two-phase) with any type of orthodontic braces (removable, fixed, functional) or head-braces versus late treatment in adolescents (one-phase) with any type of orthodontic braces or head-braces, and trials that compared any type of orthodontic braces or head-braces versus no treatment or another type of orthodontic brace or appliance (where treatment started at a similar age in the intervention groups).We excluded trials involving participants with a cleft lip or palate, or other craniofacial deformity/syndrome, and trials that recruited patients who had previously received surgical treatment for their Class II malocclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors screened the search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. We used the fixed-effect model for meta-analyses including two or three studies and the random-effects model for more than three studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 RCTs based on data from 1251 participants.Three trials compared early treatment with a functional appliance versus late treatment for overjet, ANB and incisal trauma. After phase one of early treatment (i.e. before the other group had received any intervention), there was a reduction in overjet and ANB reduction favouring treatment with a functional appliance; however, when both groups had completed treatment, there was no difference between groups in final overjet (MD 0.21, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.51, P = 0.18; 343 participants) (low-quality evidence) or ANB (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.43; 347 participants) (moderate-quality evidence). Early treatment with functional appliances reduced the incidence of incisal trauma compared to late treatment (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.95; 332 participants) (moderate-quality evidence). The difference in the incidence of incisal trauma was clinically important with 30% (51/171) of participants reporting new trauma in the late treatment group compared to only 19% (31/161) of participants who had received early treatment.Two trials compared early treatment using headgear versus late treatment. After phase one of early treatment, headgear had reduced overjet and ANB; however, when both groups had completed treatment, there was no evidence of a difference between groups in overjet (MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.12; 238 participants) (low-quality evidence) or ANB (MD -0.27, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.26; 231 participants) (low-quality evidence). Early (two-phase) treatment with headgear reduced the incidence of incisal trauma (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.80; 237 participants) (low-quality evidence), with almost half the incidence of new incisal trauma (24/117) compared to the late treatment group (44/120).Seven trials compared late treatment with functional appliances versus no treatment. There was a reduction in final overjet with both fixed functional appliances (MD -5.46 mm, 95% CI -6.63 to -4.28; 2 trials, 61 participants) and removable functional appliances (MD -4.62, 95% CI -5.33 to -3.92; 3 trials, 122 participants) (low-quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in final ANB between fixed functional appliances and no treatment (MD -0.53°, 95% CI -1.27 to -0.22; 3 trials, 89 participants) (low-quality evidence), but removable functional appliances seemed to reduce ANB compared to no treatment (MD -2.37°, 95% CI -3.01 to -1.74; 2 trials, 99 participants) (low-quality evidence).Six trials compared orthodontic treatment for adolescents with Twin Block versus other appliances and found no difference in overjet (0.08 mm, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.76; 4 trials, 259 participants) (low-quality evidence). The reduction in ANB favoured treatment with a Twin Block (-0.56°, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.16; 6 trials, 320 participants) (low-quality evidence).Three trials compared orthodontic treatment for adolescents with removable functional appliances versus fixed functional appliances and found a reduction in overjet in favour of fixed appliances (0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.33; two trials, 154 participants) (low-quality evidence), and a reduction in ANB in favour of removable appliances (-1.04°, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.49; 3 trials, 185 participants) (low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of low to moderate quality suggests that providing early orthodontic treatment for children with prominent upper front teeth is more effective for reducing the incidence of incisal trauma than providing one course of orthodontic treatment in adolescence. There appear to be no other advantages of providing early treatment when compared to late treatment. Low-quality evidence suggests that, compared to no treatment, late treatment in adolescence with functional appliances, is effective for reducing the prominence of upper front teeth.

Trends in Contemporary Orthodontic Research Publications: Evaluation of Three Major Orthodontic Journals

Background

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the inclination of orthodontic research published in original articles in three of the most popular and recognized orthodontic journals with high impact factor; American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), the Angle Orthodontist (AO), and European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO) published in a 5-year duration time frame (2010–2014).

Materials and Methods

Online search with supplementary hand searching was undertaken for original research articles in these three orthodontic journals from 2010 to 2014. Classification of data was completed autonomously by manual and direct appraisal of the manuscript of each journal.

Results and Conclusion

Three thousand one hundred and forty articles published in AJODO, AO, and EJO in the particular time period were selected, out of which 1783 original research study articles (56.78%) were appraised for classification in their various respective knowledge domains. AO (82.73%) and EJO (76.99%) were relatively more committed toward publication of research work in comparison to AJODO (34.55%). Research articles based on perception and questionnaires (12%), temporary anchorage devices (11%), cone-beam computed tomography (8%), invisible orthodontics (lingual orthodontics, clear aligners, esthetic brackets, and wires) (5%), and airway examination (5%) were the five most recurrently selected subjects of interest (41%) in these three journals during the observation period. The total number of research articles published in the three journals reduced statistically significantly in 2014 when compared to 2010.

Influence of long-term in vivo exposure, debris accumulation and archwire material on friction force among different types of brackets and archwires couples

Objective

The aim was to assess the influence of long-term in vivo exposure, debris accumulation and archwire material on static and kinetic friction force among different types of brackets and archwires couples.

Material and Methods

Friction testing was performed among four lower incisors' brackets, conventional and self-ligating (SL), coupled with either nickel-titanium or stainless steel archwires, as-received and in vivo exposed in 18 subjects. The friction testing was performed for a sliding distance of 14 mm at a speed of 10 mm/min, with a starting force of 0.2 N. Wear and quantitative assessment of debris accumulation was performed on pictures of brackets obtained using a scanning electron microscope. Non parametric tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Only bracket type, but not exposure duration, amount of debris accumulation, archwire material or their manufacturer, was significantly correlated with both static (rho = 0.602, P < 0.001) and kinetic (rho = 0.584, P < 0.001) friction force. Within each bracket type no significant difference was observed between as-received and in vivo exposed brackets for any friction parameter except for the SL brackets in which significantly higher static and kinetic (P = 0.001, at least) friction forces were seen in in vivo exposed SL brackets (164.9 cN and 217.63 cN, respectively) in comparison with as-received SL brackets (19.69 cN and 55.72 cN, respectively).

Limitation

The frictional testing was performed in the dry condition which might have influenced the results.

Conclusion

A significant correlation was seen between friction force and bracket type, while treatment duration, amount of debris accumulation, archwire material or their manufacturer was not significantly correlated to it. Nevertheless, higher friction forces were measured among in vivo aged SL brackets in comparison with as-received ones.

Therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Over the last few years, the use of self-ligating brackets in orthodontics has progressed considerably. These systems have been the subject of numerous studies with good levels of evidence making it possible to evaluate their efficacy and efficiency compared to conventional brackets. The aim of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets by means of a systematic review of the scientific literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic study was undertaken in the form of a recent search of the electronic Pubmed database, oriented by the use of several keywords combined by Boolean operators relating to the therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets through the study of tooth alignment, space closure, expansion, treatment duration and degree of discomfort. The search was limited to randomized controlled studies, and two independent readers identified studies corresponding to the selection criteria.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The chosen articles comprised 20 randomized controlled trials. The studies analyzed revealed the absence of significant differences between the two types of system on the basis of the clinical criteria adopted, thereby refuting the hypothesis of the superiority of self-ligating brackets over conventional systems.

Comparative evaluation of efficacy of self-ligating interactive bracket with conventional preadjusted bracket: A clinical study

Aims and Objectives:

This clinical study was conducted to compare the interactive self-ligating twin brackets and the standard double width brackets for their efficiency in Rate of Retraction.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 20 patients with Angle's class I or class II or class III dento-alveolar malocclusions between the age group of 18-25 years were selected. 10 patients in each group both males and females were randomly selected for the study. Ten patients were bonded using conventional brackets (Group I) the other ten patients were bonded using Interactive self-ligating brackets (Group II). The Rate of retraction was quantified using the scanned models. Pretreatment and post treatment models were taken and scanned to measure the amount of Incisor movement and Anchor loss.

Results:

(1) Interactive Self-ligating brackets showed significant Rate of retraction when compared with conventional brackets on right and left quadrant. (Group I 0.545 ± .205: Group II 0.827 ± .208 P = .013*) (Group I 0.598 ± .160: Group II 0.804 ± .268 P = .071) (2) Interactive self-ligating brackets when compared with conventional brackets had significant amount of incisor movement on right and left quadrant. (Group I 3.51 ± .548: Group II 4.38 ± .1.06 P = .047*) and (Group I 3.66 ± .899: Group II 4.67 ± 1.02 P = .047*) (3) Conventional brackets showed significant Amount of Anchor loss when compared with that of Interactive self-ligating brackets on right and left quadrant. (Group I .948 ± .392: Group II 0.501 ± .229 P = .013*). In the left side (Group I 0.861 ± .464: Group II 0.498 ± .227 P = .060).

Conclusion:

The interactive self-ligating brackets show more efficiency in Rate of Retraction, Amount of Incisor movement and Amount of Anchor loss when compared with the conventional brackets.

Differences of treatment outcomes between self-ligating brackets with microimplant and headgear anchorages in adults with bimaxillary protrusion

INTRODUCTION

Our aim was to determine differences between the outcomes of treatment using microimplant anchorage compared with headgear anchorage in adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion treated with self-ligating brackets.

METHODS

Thirty-one adult orthodontic patients (13 men, 18 women; age, 25.87 ± 3.37 years) who were diagnosed with bimaxillary protrusion were selected. All patients were treated with self-ligating brackets and maximum anchorage after extraction of 4 first premolars. Group 1 received microimplant anchorage, and group 2 received headgear. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained before and after treatment. Differences in the skeletal and dental parameters between and within groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed in the mean treatment times between the groups (21.93 ± 3.10 vs 23.88 ± 2.68 months). There was no significant difference in skeletal measurements before or after treatment in patients who received microimplant anchorage. Patients who received headgear anchorage had an increase of the mandibular plane angle. The microimplant anchorage group had greater anterior tooth retraction and less maxillary molar mesialization than did the headgear group.

CONCLUSIONS

In both the anteroposterior and vertical directions, microimplant anchorage achieved better control than did the traditional headgear appliance during the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion.

A multi-center randomized controlled trial to compare a self-ligating bracket with a conventional bracket in a UK population: Part 1: Treatment efficiency

OBJECTIVE

To use a two-arm parallel trial to compare treatment efficiency between a self-ligating and a conventional preadjusted edgewise appliance system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted in three hospital orthodontic departments. Subjects were randomly allocated to receive treatment with either a self-ligating (3M SmartClip) or conventional (3M Victory) preadjusted edgewise appliance bracket system using a computer-generated random sequence concealed in opaque envelopes, with stratification for operator and center. Two operators followed a standardized protocol regarding bracket bonding procedure and archwire sequence. Efficiency of each ligation system was assessed by comparing the duration of treatment (months), total number of appointments (scheduled and emergency visits), and number of bracket bond failures.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight subjects (mean age 14 years 11 months) were enrolled in the study, of which 135 subjects (97.8%) completed treatment. The mean treatment time and number of visits were 25.12 months and 19.97 visits in the SmartClip group and 25.80 months and 20.37 visits in the Victory group. The overall bond failure rate was 6.6% for the SmartClip and 7.2% for Victory, with a similar debond distribution between the two appliances. No significant differences were found between the bracket systems in any of the outcome measures. No serious harm was observed from either bracket system.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no clinically significant difference in treatment efficiency between treatment with a self-ligating bracket system and a conventional ligation system.

Mandibular changes during initial alignment with SmartClip self-ligating and conventional brackets: A single-center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Objective

To test the null hypothesis that SmartClip self-ligating brackets are more effective than conventional brackets for initial mandibular alignment and identify influential factors.

Methods

Fifty patients were randomly allocated to two equal treatment groups by using an online randomization program: self-ligating group (SmartClip brackets) and conventional group (Gemini brackets). The archwire sequence was standardized. Changes in anterior irregularity index, intercanine width, and intermolar width were assessed on plaster models at 8th and 16th weeks. Changes in incisor position and inclination were assessed on lateral cephalometric radiographs at 16 weeks. Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were performed with paired t-test and Student's t-test, respectively. Multiple linear regression was performed to identify variables affecting improvement in anterior ambiguity.

Results

Data of 46 patients were analyzed; those missing an appointment (n = 2) or showing bracket breakage (n = 2) were excluded. Incisor inclination (p < 0.05), intercanine width (p < 0.05), and intermolar width (p > 0.05) increased at 8 and 16 weeks in both the groups; no significant intergroup differences were noted (p > 0.05). Initial anterior irregularity index and intercanine width change were significantly associated with improvement in anterior irregularity (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The null hypothesis was rejected. Bracket type has little effect on improvement in anterior ambiguity during initial mandibular alignment.

The effect of perturbations on resistance to sliding in second-order moments comparing two different bracket types

Orthodontic literature has shown all ligation methods to behave similarly in the clinical situation; however, the reasoning behind this still requires further investigation. A novel frictional device able to measure forces at the level of the bracket along with a custom perturbation device was used to investigate the effect of perturbations on resistance to sliding (RS) using conventional and passive ligated brackets. 150 3M Victory Series twins (0.022 slot) and 150 Damon Q brackets (0.022 slot) were tested using an 0.018 x 0.025 stainless steel wire for RS. There were 5 test groups consisting of equal numbers (n=30) representing combinations of high and low amplitude and frequency of perturbations along with a control. Second order angulation tested ranged from 0 to 6 degrees. Results for conventional brackets in the presence of perturbations at 0 degrees showed there was a statistically significant reduction (P<0.001) in RS when compared to controls. At 6 degrees, this difference (P<0.001) was seen in both high perturbation groups and one of the low perturbation groups. For passive ligated brackets, no statistically significant difference between groups was seen at 0 degrees. However, at 6 degrees high perturbation groups both resulted in statistically significant (P<0.001) reductions in RS when compared to controls. From this study it was concluded that passive ligated brackets have a lower RS when compared to conventional ligated brackets under all test conditions and angulations. Also, amplitude of perturbations has a larger role than frequency in reduction of RS values.

Debris and friction of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic brackets after clinical use

Objective: 

To compare the degree of debris and friction of conventional and self-ligating orthodontic brackets before and after clinical use.

Materials and Methods: 

Two sets of three conventional and self-ligating brackets were bonded from the first molar to the first premolar in eight individuals, for a total of 16 sets per type of brackets. A passive segment of 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was inserted into each group of brackets. Frictional force and debris level were evaluated as received and after 8 weeks of intraoral exposure. Two-way analysis of variance and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were applied at P &lt; .05.

Results: 

After the intraoral exposure, there was a significant increase of debris accumulation in both systems of brackets (P &lt; .05). However, the self-ligating brackets showed a higher amount of debris compared with the conventional brackets. The frictional force in conventional brackets was significantly higher when compared with self-ligating brackets before clinical use (P &lt; .001). Clinical exposure for 8 weeks provided a significant increase of friction (P &lt; .001) on both systems. In the self-ligating system, the mean of friction increase was 0.21 N (191%), while 0.52 N (47.2%) was observed for the conventional system.

Conclusion: 

Self-ligating and conventional brackets, when exposed to the intraoral environment, showed a significant increase in frictional force during the sliding mechanics. Debris accumulation was higher for the self-ligating system.

A comparative in-vivo evaluation of the alignment efficiency of 5 ligation methods: A prospective randomized clinical trial

Objectives:

To conduct a prospective randomized study comparing the efficiency of 5 different ligation systems (ELL; elastomeric ligature, SSL; stainless steel ligature, LL; leone slide ligature, PSL; passive self-ligation and ASL; active self-ligation) over the duration of mandibular crowding alleviation.

Materials and Methods:

Fifty consecutive patients (54.2% male, 45.8% female; mean age: 16.69 years) satisfying the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated to 5 ligation groups with an equal sample size of 10 per group. The 5 groups received treatment with 0.022-inch MBT pre-adjusted edge-wise technique (ELL: Gemini 3M Unitek, SSL: Gemini 3M Unitek, LL: Gemini 3M Unitek, PSL: SmartClip 3M Unitek and ASL: In-Ovation R Euro GAC International). The models and cephalograms were evaluated for anterior arch alignment, extraction space closure, and lower incisal inclinations at pre-treatment T₁ and at the end of initial alignment T₂. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Post-hoc tests were used for data analysis.

Results:

Forty-eight participants completed the study, and SL systems showed a significant difference over CL groups in time to alignment, passive space closure, and incisal inclination. Multiple regression showed a reduction of 5.28 days in time to alignment by changing the ligation group in the order of ELL to ASL group and 1 mm increase in initial irregularity index increases time to alignment by 11.68 days.

Conclusion:

Self-ligation brackets were more efficient than conventional ligation brackets during initial leveling and alignment.

Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: a single-center randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare the time to initial alignment and extraction space closure using conventional brackets and active and passive self-ligating brackets.

METHODS

One hundred adolescent patients 11 to 18 years of age undergoing maxillary and mandibular fixed appliance therapy after the extraction of 4 premolars were randomized with stratification of 2 age ranges (11-14 and 15-18 years) and 3 maxillomandibular plane angles (high, medium, and low) with an allocation ratio of 1:2:2. Restrictions were applied using a block size of 10. Allocation was to 1 of 3 treatment groups: conventional brackets, active self-ligating, or passive self-ligating brackets. All subjects were treated with the same archwire sequence and space-closing mechanics in a district general hospital setting. The trial was a 3-arm parallel design. Labial-segment alignment and space closure were measured on study models taken every 12 weeks throughout treatment. All measurements were made by 1 operator who was blinded to bracket type. The patients and other operators were not blinded to bracket type during treatment.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients were followed to completion of treatment (conventional, n = 20; active self-ligating brackets, n = 37; passive self-ligating brackets, n = 41). The data were analyzed using linear mixed models and demonstrated a significant effect of bracket type on the time to initial alignment (P = 0.001), which was shorter with the conventional brackets than either of the self-ligating brackets. Sidak's adjustment showed no significant difference in effect size (the difference in average response in millimeters) between the active and passive self-ligating brackets (the results are presented as effect size, 95% confidence intervals, probabilities, and intraclass correlation coefficients) (-0.42 [-1.32, 0.48], 0.600, 0.15), but the conventional bracket was significantly different from both of these (-1.98 [-3.19, -0.76], 0.001, 0.15; and -1.56 [-2.79, -0.32], 0.001, 0.15). There was no statistically significant difference between any of the 3 bracket types with respect to space closure. Space-closure times were shorter in the mandible, except for the Damon 3MX bracket (Ormco, Orange, Calif), where active and total space-closure times were shorter in the maxilla. No adverse events were recorded in the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to initial alignment was significantly shorter for the conventional bracket than for either the active or passive self-ligating brackets. There was no statistically significant difference in passive, active, or total space-closure times among the 3 brackets under investigation.

Geometric morphometric evaluations of a randomized prospective split-mouth study on modes of ligation and reverse-curve mechanics

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate tooth position after six and 9 months of orthodontics with conventional brackets on one side of the dentition and ligature-less brackets on the other.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

Orthodontic Division, Vienna Medical University. Twenty patients aged 22.5 ± 5.7 years, symmetrical malocclusion and arch form, no premolar extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective split-mouth study, 0.022-inch SmartClip self-ligating brackets assigned randomly to the left or right dentition, conventional 0.018-inch brackets on the other side. 52 dental landmarks, digitized on plaster casts, represented dental arches at baseline (t0), 6 months and 9 months (t1, t2). During t0-t1, we used 0.016 and 0.014 x 0.025 inch superelastic wires, during t1-t2 connected reverse-curve hemiarch wires: 0.017 x 0.025 inch ß-titanium on the ligature-less side, and 0.016 x 0.022 inch Elgiloy multiloop wires on conventional brackets. Morphometric analyses were used to assess differences in dental arch shapes.

RESULTS

Neither initial alignment nor the reverse-curve phase showed statistically significant differences between ligature-less and conventional brackets in moving teeth.

CONCLUSION

Morphometric shape analyses corroborated current evidence that self-ligating brackets were no more effective than conventional brackets with steel ligatures after 6-month initial alignment. From months 6-9 treatment with ß-titanium reverse-curve wires on 0.022-inch ligature-less brackets resulted in similar tooth positions as accomplished by Elgiloy multiloop wires on 0.018-inch steel-ligature-tied brackets.