The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Frictional property comparisons of conventional and self-ligating lingual brackets according to tooth displacement during initial leveling and alignment: an in vitro mechanical study

  • Kim, Do-Yoon (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lim, Bum-Soon (Department of Biomaterials Science, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Baek, Seung-Hak (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2015.06.15
  • Accepted : 2015.08.04
  • Published : 2016.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: We evaluated the effects of tooth displacement on frictional force when conventional ligating lingual brackets (CL-LBs), CL-LBs with a narrow bracket width, and self-ligating lingual brackets (SL-LBs) were used with initial leveling and alignment wires. Methods: CL-LBs (7th Generation), CL-LBs with a narrow bracket width (STb), and SL-LBs (In-Ovation L) were tested under three tooth displacement conditions: no displacement (control); a 2-mm palatal displacement (PD) of the maxillary right lateral incisor (MXLI); and a 2-mm gingival displacement (GD) of the maxillary right canine (MXC) (nine groups, n = 7 per group). A stereolithographic typodont system and artificial saliva were used. Static and kinetic frictional forces (SFF and KFF, respectively) were measured while drawing a 0.013-inch copper-nickel-titanium archwire through brackets at 0.5 mm/min for 5 minutes at $36.5^{\circ}C$. Results: The In-Ovation L exhibited lower SFF under control conditions and lower KFF under all displacement conditions than the 7th Generation and STb (all p < 0.001). No significant difference in SFF existed between the In-Ovation L and STb for a 2-mm GD of the MXC and 2-mm PD of the MXLI. A 2-mm GD of the MXC produced higher SFF and KFF than a 2-mm PD of the MXLI in all brackets (all p < 0.001). Conclusions: CL-LBs with narrow bracket widths exhibited higher KFF than SL-LBs under tooth displacement conditions. CL-LBs and ligation methods should be developed to produce SFF and KFF as low as those in SL-LBs during the initial and leveling stage.

Keywords

References

  1. Fujita K. New orthodontic treatment with lingual bracket mushroom arch wire appliance. Am J Orthod 1979;76:657-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(79)90211-2
  2. Smith JR, Gorman JC, Kurz C, Dunn RM. Keys to success in lingual therapy. Part 1. J Clin Orthod 1986;20:252-61.
  3. Creekmore T. Lingual orthodontics--its renaissance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;96:120-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(89)90253-9
  4. Moran KI. Relative wire stiffness due to lingual versus labial interbracket distance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92:24-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90292-7
  5. Takemoto K. Lingual orthodontics extraction therapy. Clin Impr 1995;4:2-7,18-21.
  6. Geron S. Finishing with lingual appliances, problems and solutions. Semin Orthod 2006;12:191-202. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2006.05.007
  7. Lombardo L, Arreghini A, Al Ardha K, Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Siciliani G. Wire load-deflection characteristics relative to different types of brackets. Int Orthod 2011;9:120-39.
  8. Khattab TZ, Farah H, Al-Sabbagh R, Hajeer MY, Haj-Hamed Y. Speech performance and oral impairments with lingual and labial orthodontic appliances in the first stage of fixed treatment. Angle Orthod 2013;83:519-26. https://doi.org/10.2319/073112-619.1
  9. Park KH, Bayome M, Park JH, Lee JW, Baek SH, Kook YA. New classification of lingual arch form in normal occlusion using three dimensional virtual models. Korean J Orthod 2015;45:74-81. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.2.74
  10. Kusy RP, Whitley JQ. Resistance to sliding of orthodontic appliances in the dry and wet states: influence of archwire alloy, interbracket distance, and bracket engagement. J Biomed Mater Res 2000;52:797-811. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4636(20001215)52:4<797::AID-JBM25>3.0.CO;2-9
  11. 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.
  12. 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
  13. Lombardo L, Wierusz W, Toscano D, Lapenta R, Kaplan A, Siciliani G. Frictional resistance exerted by different lingual and labial brackets: an in vitro study. Prog Orthod 2013;14:37. https://doi.org/10.1186/2196-1042-14-37
  14. Celikoglu M, Bayram M, Nur M, Kilkis D. Mandibular changes during initial alignment with SmartClip self-ligating and conventional brackets: a single-center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Korean J Orthod 2015;45:89-94. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.2.89
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. Seo YJ, Lim BS, Park YG, Yang IH, Ahn SJ, Kim TW, et al. Effect of self-ligating bracket type and vibration on frictional force and stick-slip phenomenon in diverse tooth displacement conditions: an in vitro mechanical analysis. Eur J Orthod 2015;37:474-80. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cju060
  18. 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
  19. Park JH, Lee YK, Lim BS, Kim CW. Frictional forces between lingual brackets and archwires measured by a friction tester. Angle Orthod 2004;74:816-24.
  20. Ozturk Ortan Y, Yurdakuloglu Arslan T, Aydemir B. A comparative in vitro study of frictional resistance between lingual brackets and stainless steel archwires. Eur J Orthod 2012;34:119-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq180
  21. Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Takemoto Y, Takemoto A, Lombardo L. A new lingual straight-wire technique. J Clin Orthod 2010;44:114-23.
  22. Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Takemoto Y, Scuzzo G, Lombardo L. A new self-ligating lingual bracket with square slots. J Clin Orthod 2011;45:682-90.
  23. Xia Z, Chen J. Biomechanical validation of an artificial tooth-periodontal ligament-bone complex for in vitro orthodontic load measurement. Angle Orthod 2013;83:410-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/041712-317.1

Cited by

  1. Root resorption during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating or conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis vol.16, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-016-0320-y