The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

The effect of occlusogingival placement of clinical bracket points on the adaptation of a straight wire to the lingual arch form

  • Abdi, Amir Hossein (Electrical and computer Engineering Department, University of British Columbia) ;
  • Motamedian, Saeed Reza (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Balaghi, Ehsan (Department of Orthodontics, Dental Faculty, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Nouri, Mahtab (Dentofacial Deformities Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2017.08.16
  • Accepted : 2018.01.03
  • Published : 2018.07.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the adaptation of a straight wire between brackets positioned at the mid-lingual surface and those placed gingivally by using a three-dimensional simulation software. Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed using OrthoAid, an in-house software. The subjects were 36 adolescents with normal Class I occlusion. For each dental cast, two bracket positioning approaches, namely the middle and gingival, were examined. In the middle group, the reference points were placed on the mid-lingual surface of each tooth, while in the gingival group, the reference points were positioned lingually on the anterior teeth. A 4th degree polynomial was adopted, and the in-plane and off-plane root mean squares (RMSs) of the distances between the reference points and the fitted polynomial curve were calculated using the software. Statistical analysis was performed using the paired-samples t-test (${\alpha}=0.05$). Results: The mean in-plane RMS of the polynomial curve to the bracket distance in the gingival group was significantly lower than that in the middle group (p < 0.001). The off-plane RMS was higher in the gingivally positioned brackets in the maxilla than in the middle group (p < 0.001). However, the off-plane RMS in mandible was not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.274). Conclusions: The results demonstrated that the gingival placement of lingual brackets on the anterior teeth could decrease the distance between a tooth and the straight wire.

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. Kurz C, Swartz ML, Andreiko C. Lingual orthodontics: a status report. Part 2: Research and development. J Clin Orthod 1982;16:735-40.
  3. Takemoto K, Scuzzo G, Lombardo LU, Takemoto YU. Lingual straight wire method. Int Orthod 2009; 7:335-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1761-7227(09)73507-7
  4. Shpack N, Geron S, Floris I, Davidovitch M, Brosh T, Vardimon AD. Bracket placement in lingual vs labial systems and direct vs indirect bonding. Angle Orthod 2007;77:509-17. https://doi.org/10.2319/0003-3219(2007)077[0509:BPILVL]2.0.CO;2
  5. Balut N, Klapper L, Sandrik J, Bowman D. Variations in bracket placement in the preadjusted orthodontic appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 102:62-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(92)70015-3
  6. Geron S. The lingual bracket jig. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33:457-63.
  7. Stamm T, Wiechmann D, Heinecken A, Ehmer U. Relation between second and third order problems in lingual orthodontic treatment. J Ling Orthod 2000;1:5.
  8. Geron S, Romano R, Brosh T. Vertical forces in labial and lingual orthodontics applied on maxillary incisors--a theoretical approach. Angle Orthod 2004; 74:195-201.
  9. Liang W, Rong Q, Lin J, Xu B. Torque control of the maxillary incisors in lingual and labial orthodontics: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:316-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.039
  10. 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
  11. Wiechmann D, Rummel V, Thalheim A, Simon JS, Wiechmann L. Customized brackets and archwires for lingual orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:593-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.08.008
  12. Takemoto K, Scuzzo G. The straight-wire concept in lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 2001;35:46-52.
  13. Nouri M, Asefi S, Akbarzadeh Baghban A, Ahmadvand M, Shamsa M. Objective vs subjective analysesof arch form and preformed archwire selection. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149:543-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.09.023
  14. Padisar P, Nouri M, Zajkani E. Changes in mandibular anterior teeth alignment of 12-14 years oldsduring a 4-years follow up in Qazvin. Iranian J Orthod 2008;3:109-15.
  15. Nouri M, Farzan A, Safavi MR, Akbarzadeh Bagheban A. Evaluation of number of reference clinicalpoints effect on dental arch curve construction with three-dimensional method. J Indian Dent Assoc 2012;24:104-10.
  16. Nouri M, Massudi R, Bagheban AA, Azimi S, Fereidooni F. The accuracy of a 3-D laser scanner forcrown width measurements. Aust Orthod J 2009;25:41-7.
  17. Thurow RC. Edgewise orthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1982. p. 327.
  18. Archambault A, Major TW, Carey JP, Heo G, Badawi H, Major PW. A comparison of torque expressionbetween stainless steel, titanium molybdenum alloy, and copper nickel titanium wires in metallic selfligatingbrackets. Angle Orthod 2010;80:884-9. https://doi.org/10.2319/102809-604.1
  19. Morina E, Eliades T, Pandis N, Jäger A, Bourauel C. Torque expression of self-ligating brackets comparedwith conventional metallic, ceramic, and plastic brackets. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:233-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn005
  20. Sifakakis I, Pandis N, Makou M, Eliades T, Katsaros C, Bourauel C. A comparative assessment of torque generated by lingual and conventional brackets. Eur J Orthod 2013;35:375-80. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs029
  21. Manni A, Cirulli N, Grassi R. Personalized orthodontic bracket height in relation to marginal ridges. World J Orthod 2007;8:e10-4.
  22. Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Takemoto Y, Takemoto A, Lombardo L. A new lingual straight-wire technique. J Clin Orthod 2010;44:114-23; quiz 106.
  23. Fillion D. Clinical advantages of the Orapix-straight wire lingual technique. Int Orthod 2010;8:125-51.
  24. Fillion D. Lingual straightwire treatment with the Orapix system. J Clin Orthod 2011;45:488-97; quiz 515.
  25. Lombardo L, Saba L, Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Oteo L, Palma JC, et al. A new concept of anatomic lingual arch form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:260.e1-13; discussion 260-1.
  26. Oda S, Arai K, Nakahara R. Commercially available archwire forms compared with normal dental arch forms in a Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:520-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.025
  27. Kairalla SA, Scuzzo G, Trivino T, Velasco L, Lombardo L, Paranhos LR. Determining shapes and dimensions of dental arches for the use of straight- wire arches in lingual technique. Dental Press J Orthod 2014;19:116-22. https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.19.5.116-122.oar
  28. Felton JM, Sinclair PM, Jones DL, Alexander RG. A computerized analysis of the shape and stability of mandibular arch form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92:478-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90229-0
  29. AlHarbi S, Alkofide EA, AlMadi A. Mathematical analyses of dental arch curvature in normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 2008;78:281-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/121806-516.1
  30. Noroozi H, Nik TH, Saeeda R. The dental arch form revisited. Angle Orthod 2001;71:386-9.

Cited by

  1. Agreement of the clinician's choice of archwire selection on conventional and virtual models vol.89, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2319/051818-375.1