Influence of anatomical barriers on maxillary incisor root resorption after orthodontic treatment with premolar extractions

INTRODUCTION: Apical root resorption is a frequent and occasionally critical problem in orthodontic patients undergoing induced tooth movement. One of the factors that might influence prognosis, especially in maxillary incisors, which most frequently present resorptions, are the so-called the anatomical barriers; that is, proximity of the buccal and palatal cortical bones to the maxillary incisor roots. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research was to investigate whether patients with excessive vertical growth really present a small distance between the alveolar cortical bones and the maxillary incisor roots, and whether there is a correlation between this distance and the root resorption index in comparison with patients presenting horizontal growth. METHODS: The sample comprised orthodontic records of 18 patients with extraction planning of first maxillary premolars and treatment by the standard and/or preadjusted edgewise brackets. Their initial and final periapical radiographs were evaluated to determine the amount of root resorption that occurred. RESULTS: On the palatal side, patients with excessive vertical growth (Group 2 - SN-GoGn > 43º) showed a narrower alveolar bone than the horizontal growth patients (Group 1 - SN-GoGn < 29º). However, the distance between the buccal cortical bone and the central incisor root apex showed no significant difference between Groups 1 and 2; CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that there are no correlations between the proximity of buccal cortical bone, maxillary incisor roots and the root resorption index.

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.

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.

Torque efficiency of different archwires in 0.018- and 0.022-inch conventional brackets.

OBJECTIVE To compare the archwires inserted during the final stages of the orthodontic treatment with the generated moments at 0.018- and 0.022-inch brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS The same bracket type, in terms of prescription, was evaluated in both slot dimensions. The brackets were bonded on two identical maxillary acrylic resin models, and each model was mounted on the orthodontic measurement and simulation system. Ten 0.017 × 0.025-inch TMA and ten 0.017 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwires were evaluated in the 0.018-inch brackets. In the 0.022-inch brackets, ten 0.019 × 0.025-inch TMA and ten 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwires were measured. A 15° buccal root torque (+15°) and then a 15° palatal root torque (-15°) were gradually applied to the right central incisor bracket, and the moments were recorded at these positions. A t-test was conducted to compare the generated moments between wires within the 0.018- and 0.022-inch bracket groups separately. RESULTS The 0.017 × 0.025-inch archwire in the 0.018-inch brackets generated mean moments of 9.25 Nmm and 14.2 Nmm for the TMA and stainless steel archwires, respectively. The measured moments in the 0.022-inch brackets with the 0.019 × 0.025-inch TMA and stainless steel archwires were 6.6 Nmm and 9.3 Nmm, respectively. CONCLUSION The 0.017 × 0.025-inch stainless steel and β-Ti archwires in the 0.018-inch slot generated higher moments than the 0.019 × 0.025-inch archwires because of lower torque play. This difference is exaggerated in steel archwires, in comparison with the β-Ti, because of differences in stiffness. The differences of maximum moments between the archwires of the same cross-section but different alloys were statistically significant at both slot dimensions.

Sistemas de brackets de baja fricción en ortodoncia clínica

Los sistemas de brackets de baja fricción reducen la fricción en comparación con los convencionales. La fricción se define como la fuerza resistencia entre dos objetos en movimiento que entran en contacto. Junto con la fijación (binding) y la muesca (notching), la fricción es responsable de la resistencia de deslizamiento que se observa en ortodoncia en las etapas de alineado, nivelado y cierre de espacios. Se ha establecido que la alta fricción puede impedir que se alcancen los niveles fuerza óptima para los tejidos de soporte. Los estudios de laboratorio revelan que la fricción es menor en los sistemas de brackets de baja fricción y en los que han sido diseñados de forma correcta, la fijación es más importante en cuanto a la resistencia de deslizamiento. Los estudios clínicos apoyan la idea de que la resistencia de deslizamiento es la misma en brackets de baja fricción y en los convencionales. Además, aseguran que la fricción tiene poca influencia en el ambiente clínico. Una revisión sistemática de estudios clínicos supervisados concluye que existe poca evidencia confiable que apoye el uso de los sistemas fijos de brackets de baja fricción sobre los aparatos convencionales o viceversa. A la luz de la evidencia existente, la reducción en la fricción producida por sistemas de brackets de baja fricción no muestra ventaja clínica.

Eficacia de los métodos de reacondicionamiento de los brackets en relación a su resistencia a la tracción. Estudio in vitro

El reacondicionamiento de los brackets es una alternativa que trae consigo beneficios a la práctica ortodóncica. Por tal motivo el propósito de este estudio fue determinar la resistencia a la fuerza de tracción, de los métodos de reacondicionamiento, para ello se utilizó el Tensómetro Universal de fuerzas Z005 serie 157864 ( Zwick/Roell; BE, Alemania); con el mismo que se realizó el estudio in vitro y se obtuvo resultados que mostraron cual presentó mayor resistencia. La investigación se realizó con un total de 90 muestras, las mismas que se las dividieron en 3 grupos de 30 respectivamente. Los resultados de la prueba de tracción fueron los siguientes: grupo 1 (brackets nuevos) fue el grupo que tuvo mayor resistencia a la fuerza de tracción con una media de 11,32 MPa con una desviación estándar mínima de 10,51MPa y máxima de 12,26MPa, grupo 2 (brackets arenados) tuvo una resistencia a la fuerza de tracción de 8,36 MPa con una desviación estándar mínima de 7,20MPa y máxima de 9,49MPa y el grupo 3 (brackets flameados) tuvo una resistencia menor a la fuerza de tracción de 4,73MPa y una desviación estándar mínima de 3,37MPa y máxima de 5,84MPa. La resistencia a la fuerza de tracción de brackets nuevos y reacondicionados, mostró datos diferentes en cada grupos, los mismos que fueron estadísticamente significativos, teniendo un valor de p ≤ 0,05 y registró que el grupo de brackets arenados es el más resistente a la fuerza de tracción, referente a los dos métodos de reacondicionamiento; pero ninguno de los métodos de reacondicionamiento investigados se asemeja o supera a los valores que reporta los brackets nuevos.

Identity for harmonic oscillator brackets

An identity satisfied by the harmonic oscillator (Talmi-Moshinsky) brackets is derived from two equivalent methods for evaluating an integral often encountered in cluster model studies.

Efeito de um primer autocondicionante na resistência ao cisalhamento de bráquetes com compósito pré-incorporado

O uso de primers autocondicionantes e de bráquetes com compósito pré-incorporado tem sido apresentado como uma alternativa para a redução de passos clínicos. O propósito deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito de um primer autocondicionante (Transbond Plus Self-Etching Primer - SEP) na resistência ao cisalhamento de bráquetes com compósito pré-incorporado colados in vivo. A amostra consistiu de 92 dentes obtidos de 23 pacientes com indicação prévia de extração de 4 pré-molares. Os dentes foram divididos em 4 grupos, sendo os bráquetes colados pelo mesmo operador, alternando os quadrantes em cada paciente: Grupo 1 (controle) - Ácido fosfórico à 37% + primer (Transbond XT Primer) + compósito (Transbond XT Adhesive Paste) + bráquete convencional; Grupo 2 - Ácido fosfórico à 37% + primer + bráquete com compósito pré-incorporado; Grupo 3 SEP + compósito + bráquete convencional; Grupo 4 - SEP + bráquete com compósito pré-incorporado. Após 30 dias os pré-molares foram extraídos, sendo submetidos ao teste de resistência ao cisalhamento através da uma Máquina de Ensaios Universal, com velocidade de 0,5mm/min. Os dados obtidos pelos grupos foram analisados com 2-way ANOVA (p<0,05). As forças médias e desvios padrão obtidos foram os seguintes: Grupo 1 = 11,35 (2,36) MPa; Grupo 2 = 9,77 (2,49) MPa; Grupo 3 = 10,89 (2,60) MPa; e Grupo 4 = 10,16 (2,75) MPa. Não foi observada diferença significativa entre o uso do SEP e o de condicionador e primer tradicionais (p = 0,948). De qualquer modo, diferenças significativas na força de adesão foram observadas quando utilizados bráquetes com compósito pré-incorporado (p = 0,032). Pode ser concluído que a combinação do primer autocondicionante com o bráquete com compósito pré-incorporado apresentou valores de força de adesão adequados, sendo promissora para uso clínico.

Estudo aleatório e controlado do uso clínico de um primer autocondicionante na colagem de bráquetes ortodônticos

O uso de primers autocondicionantes tem sido proposto como uma alternativa para a redução de passos clínicos. O objetivo deste estudo clínico aleatório e controlado foi avaliar a performance de um sistema autocondicionante (Transbond Plus Self-Etching Primer, 3M Unitek - SEP) comparado a um sistema multipasso convencional (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek - TBXT) de colagem ortodôntica, durante um período de 12 meses. Vinte e oito pacientes participaram deste estudo, sendo estes alocados aos grupos SEP ou TBXT de forma aleatória, através de randomização em bloco. Um total de 548 bráquetes metálicos (Micro-Arch, prescrição Alexander, GAC International, Bohemia, NY) foram colados com uso da pasta adesiva Transbond XT (3M Unitek), sendo todos os produtos manuseados de acordo com as recomendações dos fabricantes. Foram totalizados 276 bráquetes no grupo controle e 272 no segundo. Curvas de sobrevivência Kaplan-Meier e o teste log-rank (p<0,05) foram utilizados para comparar o percentual de falhas adesivas para as duas técnicas. Ao final do período foram verificadas trinta e duas falhas adesivas (bráquetes descolados), sendo 19 (6,98%) falhas quando utilizado o primer autocondicionante (SEP) e 13 (4,71%) quando usado o primer convencional (TBXT). Não houve diferença significante entre a sobrevivência dos bráquetes entre os dois grupos avaliados (log-rank test, p=0,311). Quando a influência de gênero do paciente, arco dentário e tipo dentário (anterior ou posterior) foram analisados, somente o tipo dentário foi achado significante. Bráquetes de dentes posteriores apresentaram uma maior probabilidade de falha adesiva que os colados em dentes anteriores (p=0,013) Os autores concluem que o primer autocondicionante pode ser utilizado para colagem direta de bráquetes ortodônticos sem que sua sobrevivência clínica seja afetada.

Avaliação da percepção da dor no tratamento ortodôntico: ensaio clínico randomizado

O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar através de questionários de escalas visuais analógicas a percepção da dor após a inserção do primeiro arco ortodôntico, comparando-se o efeito analgésico de ibuprofeno, acetaminofeno, placebo e goma de mascar. Este trabalho também partiu da hipótese de que ibuprofeno, acetaminofeno e gomas de mascar seriam mais eficazes que placebo no controle da dor de origem ortodôntica e que gomas de mascar poderiam ser uma alternativa ao uso de ibuprofeno e acetaminofeno no manejo da dor dentária de origem ortodôntica. Neste estudo, tomaram parte 41 pacientes da Clínica de Ortodontia da Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Os pacientes foram aleatoriamente distribuídos em cinco diferentes grupos: placebo, acetaminofeno 500 miligramas, ibuprofeno 400 miligramas, goma de mascar e controle. Todos os indivíduos tiveram bráquetes com slots .022" colados em seus dentes e molares bandados em uma das arcadas. Os grupos placebo, ibuprofeno e acetaminofeno foram orientados a tomar 01 cápsula do respectivo composto logo após a inserção do arco inicial de liga de níquel-titânio de dimensão .014 e, se a dor persistisse, a cada 6 horas por uma semana.O grupo goma de mascar foi orientado a mascar um tablete de goma por 5 minutos imediatamente após a inserção do arco inicial de liga de níquel-titânio de dimensão .014 e a cada 6 horas por 5 minutos durante uma semana, caso a dor persistisse. O grupo controle recebeu nenhum método de controle da dor. Os indivíduos foram orientados a marcar nas escalas visuais analógicas nas primeiras 24 horas, às 09:00, 13:00, 17:00, 21:00 a percepção de dor espontânea e durante a mastigação. Do terceiro até o vigésimo primeiro dia as marcações foram feitas somente em dois tempos às 09:00 e 21:00. Através da análise estatística descritiva, concluiu-se que o placebo foi mais eficiente que ibuprofeno, acetaminofeno e goma de mascar no controle da dor ortodôntica, tanto em dor espontânea quanto em dor durante a mastigação. O grupo goma de mascar foi tão eficiente quanto o acetaminofeno no controle da dor espontânea 24 horas após a inserção do arco inicial. Para alívio da dor durante a mastigação, a goma de mascar pode ser uma alternativa à atuação medicamentosa no controle da dor ortodôntica.

Orthodontic and orthopaedic treatment for anterior open bite in children

BackgroundAnterior open bite occurs when there is a lack of vertical overlap of the upper and lower incisors. the aetiology is multifactorial including: oral habits, unfavourable growth patterns, enlarged lymphatic tissue with mouth breathing. Several treatments have been proposed to correct this malocclusion, but interventions are not supported by strong scientific evidence.ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate orthodontic and orthopaedic treatments to correct anterior open bite in children.Search methodsThe following databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 14 February 2014); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)(The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 14 February 2014); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 14 February 2014); LILACS via BIREME Virtual Health Library (1982 to 14 February 2014); BBO via BIREME Virtual Health Library (1980 to 14 February 2014); and SciELO (1997 to 14 February 2014). We searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov (to 14 February 2014). Chinese journals were handsearched and the bibliographies of papers were retrieved.Selection criteriaAll randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of orthodontic or orthopaedic treatments or both to correct anterior open bite in children.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed the eligibility of all reports identified.Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous data. the continuous data were expressed as described by the author.Main resultsThree randomised controlled trials were included comparing: effects of Frankel's function regulator-4 (FR-4) with lip-seal training versus no treatment; repelling-magnet splints versus bite-blocks; and palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup versus no treatment.The study comparing repelling-magnet splints versus bite-blocks could not be analysed because the authors interrupted the treatment earlier than planned due to side effects in four of ten patients.FR-4 associated with lip-seal training (RR = 0.02 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.38)) and removable palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup (RR = 0.23 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.48)) were able to correct anterior open bite.No study described: randomisation process, sample size calculation, there was not blinding in the cephalometric analysis and the two studies evaluated two interventions at the same time. These results should be therefore viewed with caution.Authors' conclusionsThere is weak evidence that the interventions FR-4 with lip-seal training and palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup are able to correct anterior open bite. Given that the trials included have potential bias, these results must be viewed with caution. Recommendations for clinical practice cannot be made based only on the results of these trials. More randomised controlled trials are needed to elucidate the interventions for treating anterior open bite.

Sleep-disordered breathing and orthodontic variables in children-Pilot study

Introduction: Sleep Disordered Breathing (SDB) is a highly prevalent condition associated with orofacial and dentofacial characteristics.Objective: the aim of this study was to verify the association of dental malocclusion, molar relationship, crossbite, open bite, overjet, overbite, and crowding with SDB in children aged 7-9 years.Materials and methods: Participating schools were selected randomly from within the public elementary school system. in the first phase of the study, the parents of 1216 children aged between 7 and 9 years old completed the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) questionnaire and the children had to participate in a dental examination. the evaluation of occlusion was divided into sagittal analysis, vertical analysis, and transverse analysis. in the second phase, 60 children were selected randomly to be undergone polysomnography (PSG) at a sleep clinic.Results: Among the children included, 242 (19.9%) children had normal occlusion. of the 60 children, 50 underwent PSG and 40(80%) had SDB. the crossbite and open bite showed association with SDB, p = 0.04 in both.Conclusion: Crossbite and open bite malocclusions were associated with SDB, and may be predictive of SDB in children. Studies with larger numbers of participants are needed to investigate the association of other malocclusions with SDB, and randomized clinical trials are also needed to see whether orthodontic and/or functional jaw orthopedic treatment is an option for treating children with malocclusion and SDB. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.