EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF SELF-LIGATING BRACKETS ON THE ORTHODONTIC TOOTH MOVEMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8198887Keywords:
Accelerated tooth movement, Canine distalization, Friction, Model scanning, Self-ligating bracketAbstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare effect on tooth movement and rate of canine distalization accomplish with self-ligating brackets (Gemini SL) and conventional brackets (Gemini).
Methods: Self-ligating brackets group (SLB) (18 individuals) and control group (CONT) (15 individuals) were created with cases who need fixed orthodontic treatment with exraction of first premolar in this study. Canine distalization was performed on 0.019×0.025 inch stainless steel wire using nickel-titanium (NiTi) closed coils that applied approximate force of 150 gr after levelling and aligning. Plaster models and photographic recordings were taken at the 1st, 4th and 8th weeks of distalization. The resulting plaster models were scanned with three-dimensional scanning device. The amount of canine distalization, canine distopalatinal rotation, canine tipping, molar mesialization and extraction spaces were measured.
Results: While there was no statistically significant difference in terms of canine distalization, distopalatal rotation, tipping and extraction space in the maxilla, a significant difference was observed in molar mesialization. Different from the maxilla, there was a significant difference in canine tipping values in the mandibula.
Conclusion: There was no difference in rate of orthodontic tooth movement between self-ligating brackets and conventional brackets.
References
Tanne K, Matsubara S, Hotei Y, Sakuda M, Yoshida M. Frictional forces and surface topography of a new ceramic bracket. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1994;106(3):273-8.
Proffit WR, Fields Jr HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2006.
Ho KS, West VC. Friction resistance between edgewise brackets and archwires. Australian orthodontic journal. 1991;12(2):95.
Keith O, Jones S, Davies E. The influence of bracket material, ligation force and wear on frictional resistance of orthodontic brackets. British journal of orthodontics. 1993;20(2):109-15.
Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Ricciardi A, Scribante A, Klersy C, Auricchio F. Evaluation of friction of stainless steel and esthetic self-ligating brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2003;124(4):395-402.
Oz AA, Arici N, Arici S. The clinical and laboratory effects of bracket type during canine distalization with sliding mechanics. The Angle Orthodontist. 2012;82(2):326-32.
Machibya FM, Bao X, Zhao L, Hu M. Treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss comparisons of self-ligating and conventional brackets. The Angle Orthodontist. 2013;83(2):280-5.
Shah A. Self-ligating brackets: Past, Present, and Future of orthodontics. J Dent Sci.2(1):4-8.
Miles PG, Weyant RJ, Rustveld L. A clinical trial of Damon 2™ vs conventional twin brackets during initial alignment. The Angle Orthodontist. 2006;76(3):480-5.
Damon DH. The Damon low-friction bracket; a biologically compatible straight-wire system. J Clin Orthod. 1998;32:670-80.
Zreaqat M, Hassan R. Self-Ligating Brackets: An Overview. Principles in Contemporary Orthodontics. 2011;1.
Li S, Xia Z, Liu SS-Y, Eckert G, Chen J. Three-dimensional canine displacement patterns in response to translation and controlled tipping retraction strategies. The Angle Orthodontist. 2015;85(1):18-25.
Hoggan BR, Sadowsky C. The use of palatal rugae for the assessment of anteroposterior tooth movements. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2001;119(5):482-8.
Hayashi K, Uechi J, Murata M, Mizoguchi I. Comparison of maxillary canine retraction with sliding mechanics and a retraction spring: a three-dimensional analysis based on a midpalatal orthodontic implant. The European Journal of Orthodontics. 2004;26(6):585-9.
Aksakalli S, Calik B, Kara B, Ezirganli S. Accelerated tooth movement with piezocision and its periodontal-transversal effects in patients with Class II malocclusion. The Angle Orthodontist. 2016;86(1):59-65.
Haliloglu-Ozkan T, Arici N, Arici S. In-vivo effects of flapless osteopuncture-facilitated tooth movement in the maxilla and the mandible. Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry. 2018;10(8):e761.
Shpack N, Davidovitch M, Sarne O, Panayi N, Vardimon AD. Duration and anchorage management of canine retraction with bodily versus tipping mechanics. The Angle Orthodontist. 2008;78(1):95-100.
Kiliaridis S, Lyka I, Friede H, Carlsson GE, Ahlqwist M. Vertical position, rotation, and tipping of molars without antagonists. International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2000;13(6).
Arash V, Rabiee M, Rakhshan V, Khorasani S, Sobouti F. In vitro evaluation of frictional forces of two ceramic orthodontic brackets versus a stainless steel bracket in combination with two types of archwires. Journal of orthodontic science. 2015;4(2):42.
Nishio C, da Motta AFJ, Elias CN, Mucha JN. In vitro evaluation of frictional forces between archwires and ceramic brackets. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2004;125(1):56-64.
Tecco S, Di Iorio D, Cordasco G, Verrocchi I, Festa F. An in vitro investigation of the influence of self-ligating brackets, low friction ligatures, and archwire on frictional resistance. The European Journal of Orthodontics. 2007;29(4):390-7.
Krishnan V, Davidovitch Ze. Cellular, molecular, and tissue-level reactions to orthodontic force. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2006;129(4):469. e1-. e32.
Burrow SJ. Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets. The Angle Orthodontist. 2010;80(4):626-33.
Turnbull NR, Birnie DJ. Treatment efficiency of conventional vs self-ligating brackets: effects of archwire size and material. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2007;131(3):395-9.
BAKER RW, GUAY AH, PETERSON JR HW. Current concepts of anchorage management. The Angle Orthodontist. 1972;42(2):129-38.
Tosun Y. Sabit ortodontik apareylerin biyomekanik prensipleri. İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi. 1999:6-7.
Keles A, Erverdi N, Sezen S. Bodily distalization of molars with absolute anchorage. The Angle Orthodontist. 2003;73(4):471-82.
Umemori M, Sugawara J, Mitani H, Nagasaka H, Kawamura H. Skeletal anchorage system for open-bite correction. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1999;115(2):166-74.
da Costa Monini A, Júnior LGG, Vianna AP, Martins RP. A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial. Clinical oral investigations. 2017;21(4):1047-53.
Dholakia KK, Bhat SR. Clinical efficiency of nonconventional elastomeric ligatures in the canine retraction phase of preadjusted edgewise appliance therapy: an in-vivo study. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2012;141(6):715-22.
Herman RJ, Currier GF, Miyake A. Mini-implant anchorage for maxillary canine retraction: a pilot study. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. 2006;130(2):228-35.
Miles PG. Self-ligating vs conventional twin brackets during en-masse space closure with sliding mechanics. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2007;132(2):223-5.
Mezomo M, de Lima ES, de Menezes LM, Weissheimer A, Allgayer S. Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets: a randomized clinical trial. The Angle Orthodontist. 2011;81(2):292-7.
Wahab RMA, Idris H, Yacob H, Ariffin SHZ. Canine Retraction: A Randomised Clinical Trial Comparing Damon (TM) 3 Self-Ligating with Conventional Ligating Brackets. Sains Malays. 2013;42(2):251-5.
de Almeida MR, Herrero F, Fattal A, Davoody AR, Nanda R, Uribe F. A comparative anchorage control study between conventional and self-ligating bracket systems using differential moments. The Angle Orthodontist. 2013;83(6):937-42.
Hassan SE, Hajeer MY, Alali OH, Kaddah AS. The effect of using self-ligating brackets on maxillary canine retraction: a split-mouth design randomized controlled trial. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016;17(6):496-503.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 EJONS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
