Curing lights for orthodontic bonding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION Light cure of resin-based adhesives is the mainstay of orthodontic bonding. In recent years, alternatives to conventional halogen lights offering reduced curing time and the potential for lower attachment failure rates have emerged. The relative merits of curing lights in current use, including halogen-based lamps, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and plasma arc lights, have not been analyzed systematically. In this study, we reviewed randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials to assess the risks of attachment failure and bonding time in orthodontic patients in whom brackets were cured with halogen lights, LEDs, or plasma arc systems. METHODS Multiple electronic database searches were undertaken, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL. Language restrictions were not applied. Unpublished literature was searched on ClinicalTrials.gov, the National Research Register, Pro-Quest Dissertation Abstracts, and Thesis database. Search terms included randomized controlled trial, controlled clinical trial, random allocation, double blind method, single blind method, orthodontics, LED, halogen, bond, and bracket. Authors of primary studies were contacted as required, and reference lists of the included studies were screened. RESULTS Randomized controlled trials and clinical controlled trials directly comparing conventional halogen lights, LEDs, or plasma arc systems involving patients with full arch, fixed, or bonded orthodontic appliances (not banded) with follow-up periods of a minimum of 6 months were included. Using predefined forms, 2 authors undertook independent extraction of articles; disagreements were resolved by discussion. The assessment of the risk of bias of the randomized controlled trials was based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria; 2 were excluded because of high risk of bias. In the comparison of bond failure risk with halogen lights and plasma arc lights, 1851 brackets were included in both groups. Little statistical heterogeneity was observed in this analysis (I(2) = 4.8%; P = 0.379). There was no statistical difference in bond failure risk between the groups (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.23; prediction intervals, 0.54, 1.56). Similarly, no statistical difference in bond failure risk was observed in the meta-analysis comparing halogen lights and LEDs (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.64-1.44; prediction intervals, 0.07, 13.32). The pooled estimates from both comparisons were OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74-1.17; and prediction intervals, 0.69, 1.17. CONCLUSIONS There is no evidence to support the use of 1 light cure type over another based on risk of attachment failure.

Maxillary sinus floor extension and posterior tooth inclination in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated with maxillary first molar extractions

INTRODUCTION Our objective was to investigate potential associations between maxillary sinus floor extension and inclination of maxillary second premolars and second molars in patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion whose orthodontic treatment included maxillary first molar extractions. METHODS The records of 37 patients (18 boys, 19 girls; mean age, 13.2 years; SD, 1.62 years) treated between 1998 and 2004 by 1 orthodontist with full Begg appliances were used in this study. Inclusion criteria were white patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion, sagittal overjet of ≥4 mm, treatment plan including extraction of the maxillary first permanent molars, no missing teeth, and no agenesis. Maxillary posterior tooth inclination and lower maxillary sinus area in relation to the palatal plane were measured on lateral cephalograms at 3 time points: at the start and end of treatment, and on average 2.5 years posttreatment. Data were analyzed for the second premolar and second molar inclinations by using mixed linear models. RESULTS The analysis showed that the second molar inclination angle decreased by 7° after orthodontic treatment, compared with pretreatment values, and by 11.5° at the latest follow-up, compared with pretreatment. There was evidence that maxillary sinus volume was negatively correlated with second molar inclination angle; the greater the volume, the smaller the inclination angle. For premolars, inclination increased by 15.4° after orthodontic treatment compared with pretreatment, and by 8.1° at the latest follow-up compared with baseline. The volume of the maxillary sinus was not associated with premolar inclination. CONCLUSIONS We found evidence of an association between maxillary second molar inclination and surface area of the lower sinus in patients treated with maxillary first molar extractions. Clinicians who undertake such an extraction scheme in Class II patients should be aware of this potential association and consider appropriate biomechanics to control root uprighting.

Development of labial gingival recessions in orthodontically treated patients

INTRODUCTION Our aim was to assess the prevalence of gingival recessions in patients before, immediately after, and 2 and 5 years after orthodontic treatment. METHODS Labial gingival recessions in all teeth were scored (yes or no) by 2 raters on initial, end-of-treatment, and posttreatment (2 and 5 years) plaster models of 302 orthodontic patients (38.7% male; 61.3% female) selected from a posttreatment archive. Their mean ages were 13.6 years (SD, 3.6; range, 9.5-32.7 years) at the initial assessment, 16.2 years (SD, 3.5; range, 11.7-35.1 years) at the end of treatment, 18.6 years (SD, 3.6; range, 13.7-37.2 years) at 2 years posttreatment, and 21.6 (SD, 3.5; range, 16.6-40.2 years) at 5 years posttreatment. A recession was noted (scored "yes") if the labial cementoenamel junction was exposed. All patients had a fixed retainer bonded to either the mandibular canines only (type I) or all 6 mandibular front teeth (type II). RESULTS There was a continuous increase in gingival recessions after treatment from 7% at end of treatment to 20% at 2 years posttreatment and to 38% at 5 years posttreatment. Patients less than 16 years of age at the end of treatment were less likely to develop recessions than patients more than 16 years at the end of treatment (P = 0.013). The prevalence of recessions was not associated with sex (P = 0.462) or extraction treatment (P = 0.32). The type of fixed retainer did not influence the development of recessions in the mandibular front region (P = 0.231). CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of gingival recessions steadily increases after orthodontic treatment. The recessions are more prevalent in older than in younger patients. No variable, except for age at the end of treatment, seems to be associated with the development of gingival recessions.

Gingival recessions and the change of inclination of mandibular incisors during orthodontic treatment

SUMMARY A recent systematic review demonstrated that, overall, orthodontic treatment might result in a small worsening of periodontal status. The aim of this retrospective study was to test the hypothesis that a change of mandibular incisor inclination promotes development of labial gingival recessions. One hundred and seventy-nine subjects who met the following inclusion criteria were selected: age 11-14 years at start of orthodontic treatment (TS), bonded retainer placed immediately after treatment (T₀), dental casts and lateral cephalograms available pre-treatment (TS), post-treatment (T₀), 2 years post-treatment (T₂), and 5 years post-treatment (T₅). Depending on the change of lower incisor inclination during treatment (ΔInc_Incl), the sample was divided into three groups: Retro (N = 34; ΔInc_Incl ≤ -1 degree), Stable (N = 22; ΔInc_Incl > -1 degree and ≤1 degree), and Pro (N = 123; ΔInc_Incl > 1 degree). Clinical crown heights of mandibular incisors and the presence of gingival recessions in this region were assessed on plaster models. Fisher's exact tests, one-way analysis of variance, and regression models were used for analysis of inter-group differences. The mean increase of clinical crown heights (T₀ to T₅) of mandibular incisors ranged from 0.6 to 0.91 mm in the Retro, Stable, and Pro groups, respectively; the difference was not significant (P = 0.534). At T₅, gingival recessions were present in 8.8, 4.5, and 16.3 per cent patients from the Retro, Stable, and Pro groups, respectively. The difference was not significant (P = 0.265). The change of lower incisors inclination during treatment did not affect development of labial gingival recessions in this patient group.

Impacted maxillary canines and root resorptions of neighbouring teeth: a radiographic analysis using cone-beam computed tomography

The study analyses the location of impacted maxillary canines and factors influencing root resorptions of adjacent teeth using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). In addition, the interrater reliability between observers of two different dental specialties for radiographic parameters will be evaluated. CBCT images of patients who were referred for radiographic localization of impacted maxillary canines and/or suspicion of root resorptions of adjacent teeth were included. The study analysed the exact three-dimensional location of the impacted canines in the anterior maxilla, frequency and extent of root resorptions, and potential influencing factors. To assess interrater agreement, Cohen's correlation parameters were calculated. This study comprises 113 patients with CBCT scans, and 134 impacted canines were analysed retrospectively. In the patients evaluated, 69 impacted canines were located palatally (51.49 per cent), 41 labially (30.60 per cent), and 24 (17.91 per cent) in the middle of the alveolar process. Root resorptions were found in 34 lateral incisors (25.37 per cent), 7 central incisors (5.22 per cent), 6 first premolars (4.48 per cent), and 1 second premolar (0.75 per cent). There was a significant correlation between root resorptions on adjacent teeth and localization of the impacted canine in relation to the bone, as well as vertical localization of the canine. Interrater agreement showed values of 0.546-0.877. CBCT provides accurate information about location of the impacted canine and prevalence and degree of root resorption of neighbouring teeth with high interrater correlation. This information is of great importance for surgeons and orthodontists for accurate diagnostics and interdisciplinary treatment planning.

Torque expression of 0.018 and 0.022 inch conventional brackets

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the moments generated with low- and high-torque brackets. Four different bracket prescription-slot combinations of the same bracket type (Mini Diamond® Twin) were evaluated: high-torque 0.018 and 0.022 inch and low-torque 0.018 and 0.022 inch. These brackets were bonded on identical maxillary acrylic resin models with levelled and aligned teeth and each model was mounted on the orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS). Ten specimens of 0.017 × 0.025 inch and ten 0.019 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwires (ORMCO) were evaluated in the low- and high-torque 0.018 inch and 0.022 inch brackets, respectively. The wires were ligated with elastomerics into the brackets and each measurement was repeated once after religation. Two-way analysis of variance and t-test were conducted to compare the generated moments between wires at low- and high-torque brackets separately. The maximum moment generated by the 0.017 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire in the 0.018 inch brackets at +15 degrees ranged from 14.33 and 12.95 Nmm for the high- and low-torque brackets, respectively. The measured torque in the 0.022 inch brackets with the 0.019 × 0.025 inch stainless steel archwire was 9.32 and 6.48 Nmm, respectively. The recorded differences of maximum moments between the high- and low-torque series were statistically significant. High-torque brackets produced higher moments compared with low-torque brackets. Additionally, in both high- and low-torque configurations, the thicker 0.019 × 0.025 inch steel archwire in the 0.022 inch slot system generated lower moments in comparison with the 0.017 × 0.025 inch steel archwire in the 0.018 inch slot system.

A comparative assessment of torque generated by lingual and conventional brackets

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of bracket type on the labiopalatal moments generated by lingual and conventional brackets. Incognito™ lingual brackets (3M Unitek), STb™ lingual brackets (Light Lingual System; ORMCO), In-Ovation L lingual brackets (DENTSPLY GAC), and conventional 0.018 inch slot brackets (Gemini; 3M Unitek) were bonded on identical maxillary acrylic resin models with levelled and aligned teeth. Each model was mounted on the orthodontic measurement and simulation system and 10 0.0175 × 0.0175 TMA wires were used for each bracket type. The wire was ligated with elastomerics into the Incognito, STb, and conventional brackets and each measurement was repeated once after religation. A 15 degrees buccal root torque (+15 degrees) and then a 15 degrees palatal root torque (-15 degrees) were gradually applied to the right central incisor bracket. After each activation, the bracket returned to its initial position and the moments in the sagittal plane were recorded during these rotations of the bracket. One-way analysis of variance with post hoc multiple comparisons (Tukey test at 0.05 error rate) was conducted to assess the effect on bracket type on the generated moments. The magnitude of maximum moment at +15 degrees ranged 8.8, 8.2, 7.1, and 5.8 Nmm for the Incognito, STb, conventional Gemini, and the In-Ovation L brackets, respectively; similar values were recorded at -15 degrees: 8.6, 8.1, 7.0, and 5.7 Nmm, respectively. The recorded differences of maximum moments were statistically significant, except between the Incognito and STb brackets. Additionally, the torque angles were evaluated at which the crown torque fell well below the minimum levels of 5.0 Nmm, as well as the moment/torque ratio at the last part of the activation/deactivation curve, between 10 and 15 degrees. The lowest torque expression was observed at the self-ligating lingual brackets, followed by the conventional brackets. The Incognito and STb lingual brackets generated the highest moments.

A comparative assessment of forces and moments generated by lingual and conventional brackets

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of bracket type on the labiopalatal forces and moments generated in the sagittal plane. Incognito™ lingual brackets (3M Unitek), STb™ lingual brackets (Light Lingual System; ORMCO), and conventional 0.018 inch slot brackets (Gemini; 3M Unitek) were bonded on three identical maxillary acrylic resin models, with a palatally displaced right lateral incisor. The transfer trays for the indirect bonding of the lingual brackets were constructed in certified laboratories. Each model was mounted on the orthodontic measurement and simulation system and ten 0.013 inch CuNiTi wires were used for each bracket type. The wire was ligated with elastomerics and each measurement was repeated once after re-ligation. The labiopalatal forces and the moments in the sagittal plane were recorded on the right lateral incisor. One-way analysis of variance and post hoc Scheffe pairwise comparisons were used to assess the effect on bracket type on the generated forces and moments. The magnitude of forces ranged from 1.62, 1.27, and 1.81 N for the STb, conventional, and Incognito brackets, respectively; the corresponding moments were 2.01, 1.45, and 2.19 N mm, respectively. Bracket type was a significant predictor of the generated forces (P < 0.001) and moments (P < 0.001). The produced forces were different among all three bracket types, whereas the generated moments differed between conventional and lingual brackets but not between lingual brackets.

Clinical trial design for orthodontists

High-quality research should form the basis of all clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials currently provide the gold standard for investigating the effectiveness of treatment interventions and these are increasingly being used in orthodontics. Here we discuss the reasons why this form of investigation provides the most useful evidence for assessing treatment outcome. The methods available to achieve true randomization, a fundamental component in the design of these trials, are also discussed. In addition, we focus on how to minimize bias in clinical research, not only during the design and management of a trial, but also when disseminating results. We focus on the importance of using control groups correctly and describe methods that are available to adequately power a trial. Finally, we emphasise the importance of accurate and transparent reporting, which facilitates correct communication and assessment of the evidence.