The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of passive self-ligating bracket placement on the posterior teeth on reduction of frictional force in sliding mechanics

  • Kim, Kyu-Ry (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Baek, Seung-Hak (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2015.06.03
  • Accepted : 2015.07.24
  • Published : 2016.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the static (SFF) and kinetic frictional forces (KFF) in sliding mechanics of hybrid bracket systems that involve placing a conventional bracket (CB) or active self-ligating bracket (ASLB) on the maxillary anterior teeth (MXAT) and a passive SLB (PSLB) on the maxillary posterior teeth (MXPT). Methods: The samples consisted of two thoroughbred types (group 1, anterior-CB + posterior-CB; group 2, anterior-ASLB + posterior-ASLB) and four hybrid types (group 3, anterior-CB + posterior-PSLB-type 1; group 4, anterior-CB + posterior-PSLB-type 2; group 5, anterior-ASLB + posterior-PSLB-type 1; group 6, anterior-ASLB + posterior-PSLB-type 2) (n = 13 per group). After maxillary dentition alignment and maxillary first premolars removal in the stereolithographically-made typodont system, a $0.019{\times}0.025$-inch stainless steel wire was drawn through the right quadrant of the maxillary arch at 0.5 mm/min for 5 min. The SFF and KFF were measured with a mechanical testing machine and statistical analyses were performed. Results: Four different categories of SFF and KFF were observed among all groups (all p < 0.001). Group 1 demonstrated the highest SFF and KFF; groups 4 and 3 were second and third highest, respectively. The fourth category included groups 2, 5, and 6. Placing PSLBs on the MXPT resulted in significant SFF and KFF reductions in cases with CBs on the MXAT, but not in cases with ASLBs on the MXAT. Conclusions: These data might aid in the development of a hybrid bracket system that enables low-friction sliding of an archwire through the MXPT.

Keywords

References

  1. Frank CA, Nikolai RJ. A comparative study of frictional resistances between orthodontic bracket and arch wire. Am J Orthod 1980;78:593-609. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(80)90199-2
  2. Arici N, Akdeniz BS, Arici S. Comparison of the frictional characteristics of aesthetic orthodontic brackets measured using a modified in vitro technique. Korean J Orthod 2015;45:29-37. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.1.29
  3. Shivapuja PK, Berger J. A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligation bracket systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;106:472-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70069-9
  4. Budd S, Daskalogiannakis J, Tompson BD. A study of the frictional characteristics of four commercially available self-ligating bracket systems. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:645-53. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn058
  5. Kim TK, Kim KD, Baek SH. Comparison of frictional forces during the initial leveling stage in various combinations of self-ligating brackets and archwires with a custom-designed typodont system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:187.e15-24.
  6. Krishnan M, Kalathil S, Abraham KM. Comparative evaluation of frictional forces in active and passive self-ligating brackets with various archwire alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:675-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.11.034
  7. Cordasco G, Farronato G, Festa F, Nucera R, Parazzoli E, Grossi GB. In vitro evaluation of the frictional forces between brackets and archwire with three passive self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 2009;31:643-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp054
  8. Lee SM, Hwang CJ. A comparative study of frictional force in self-ligating brackets according to the bracket-archwire angulation, bracket material, and wire type. Korean J Orthod 2015;45:13-9. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.1.13
  9. Heo W, Baek SH. Friction properties according to vertical and horizontal tooth displacement and bracket type during initial leveling and alignment. Angle Orthod 2011;81:653-61. https://doi.org/10.2319/072310-431.1
  10. Brauchli LM, Senn C, Wichelhaus A. Active and passive self-ligation-a myth? Angle Orthod 2011;81:312-8. https://doi.org/10.2319/041310-205.1
  11. Huang TH, Luk HS, Hsu YC, Kao CT. An in vitro comparison of the frictional forces between archwires and self-ligating brackets of passive and active types. Eur J Orthod 2012;34:625-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr065
  12. Pizzoni L, Ravnholt G, Melsen B. Frictional forces related to self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:283-91. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/20.3.283
  13. Thorstenson GA, Kusy RP. Resistance to sliding of orthodontic brackets with bumps in the slot floors and walls: effects of second-order angulation. Dent Mater 2004;20:881-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.04.004
  14. Hain M, Dhopatkar A, Rock P. A comparison of different ligation methods on friction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:666-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.021
  15. Stefanos S, Secchi AG, Coby G, Tanna N, Mante FK. Friction between various self-ligating brackets and archwire couples during sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:463-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.11.029
  16. Badawi HM, Toogood RW, Carey JP, Heo G, Major PW. Torque expression of self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:721-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.051
  17. Rinchuse DJ, Miles PG. Self-ligating brackets: present and future. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:216-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.018
  18. Paik CH, Ahn HW, Yang IH, Baek SH. Low-friction space closure with a hybrid bracket-tube system. J Clin Orthod 2010;44:623-7; quiz 622.
  19. Seo YJ, Lim BS, Park YG, Yang IH, Ahn SJ, Kim TW, et al. Effect of tooth displacement and vibration on frictional force and stick-slip phenomenon in conventional brackets: a preliminary in vitro mechanical analysis. Eur J Orthod 2015;37:158-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cju027
  20. Nakago T, Mitani S, Hijiya H, Hattori T, Nakagawa Y. Determination of the tooth mobility change during the orthodontic tooth movement studied by means of Periotest and MIMD (the mechanical impedance measuring device for the periodontal tissue). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;105:92-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70105-9
  21. Tanaka E, Ueki K, Kikuzaki M, Yamada E, Takeuchi M, Dalla-Bona D, et al. Longitudinal measurements of tooth mobility during orthodontic treatment using a periotest. Angle Orthod 2005;75:101-5.
  22. Henao SP, Kusy RP. Evaluation of the frictional resistance of conventional and self-ligating bracket designs using standardized archwires and dental typodonts. Angle Orthod 2004;74:202-11.
  23. Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod 1972;62:296-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(72)90268-0
  24. Henao SP, Kusy RP. Frictional evaluations of dental typodont models using four self-ligating designs and a conventional design. Angle Orthod 2005;75:75-85.
  25. Ehsani S, Mandich MA, El-Bialy TH, Flores-Mir C. Frictional resistance in self-ligating orthodontic brackets and conventionally ligated brackets. A systematic review. Angle Orthod 2009;79:592-601.
  26. Franchi L, Baccetti T, Camporesi M, Barbato E. Forces released during sliding mechanics with passive self-ligating brackets or nonconventional elastomeric ligatures. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:87-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.011
  27. Major TW, Carey JP, Nobes DS, Heo G, Major PW. Mechanical effects of third-order movement in self-ligated brackets by the measurement of torque expression. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.04.029
  28. Brauchli LM, Steineck M, Wichelhaus A. Active and passive self-ligation: a myth? Part 1: torque control. Angle Orthod 2012;82:663-9. https://doi.org/10.2319/062011-673.1
  29. Chung M, Nikolai RJ, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Third-order torque and self-ligating orthodontic bracket-type effects on sliding friction. Angle Orthod 2009;79:551-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/0003-3219(2009)079[0551:TTASOB]2.0.CO;2
  30. Tecco S, Di Iorio D, Nucera R, Di Bisceglie B, Cordasco G, Festa F. Evaluation of the friction of self-ligating and conventional bracket systems. Eur J Dent 2011;5:310-7.
  31. Oliver CL, Daskalogiannakis J, Tompson BD. Archwire depth is a significant parameter in the frictional resistance of active and interactive, but not passive, self-ligating brackets. Angle Orthod 2011;81:1036-44. https://doi.org/10.2319/122810-751.1

Cited by

  1. “In Vitro” Study About Variables that Influence in Arch Friction with Conventional and Self-Ligating Brackets vol.12, pp.20, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12203279
  2. Comparison of orthodontic space closure using micro-osteoperforation and passive self-ligating appliances or conventional fixed appliances: vol.90, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2319/111119-712.1