Objective Nowadays, CAD/CAM technologies enrich orthodontics in several ways. While they are commonly used for diagnoses and treatment planning, they can also be applied to create individualized bracket systems. The purpose of this prospective quasi-randomized study was to evaluate the clinical efficiency of a customized bracket system and its comparison with directly bonded conventional self-ligating bracket treatment. Materials and methods Altogether 38 patients were separated into two groups, treated either with direct bonded self-ligating brackets (Damon, Ormco, USA) or with indirect bonded customized CAD/CAM brackets (Insignia™, Ormco, USA). Overall treatment time, number of treatment appointments, number of lost or repositioned brackets, number of arch wires and wire bends, Little Irregularity Index, cephalometric analyses and ABO scores were compared. Superimpositions of the virtual set-ups and the treatment results of the CAD/CAM group were performed to evaluate the clinical realization of the treatment planning. Results No differences between both treatment groups were found concerning overall treatment time, number of appointments and number of archwire bends. Bonding failures occurred more often using the CAD/CAM system. Indirectly bonded brackets did not have to be repositioned as often as directly bonded brackets. Treatment results with both systems were similar concerning their effects on the reduction of ABO scores. The number of used archwires was higher in the CAD/CAM group. Treatment with both systems led to further proclination of the incisors. Proclination in the lower jaw was greater than proclination in the upper jaw, and there was a statistically significant difference between the two treatment systems. Comparing the treatment results with the virtual set-ups, mesial positions were met best, followed by vertical positions. Transversal positions showed the greatest discrepancies. Concerning angles, values of angulation showed greatest accordance to the virtual set-up, while values of inclinations showed greatest discrepancies. Conclusion In comparison with a direct bonded self-ligating bracket system the use of indirect bonded customized CAD/CAM brackets showed only minor influence on treatment efficiency and treatment outcomes. Transversal expansion, deep bite correction, expression of torque and anchorage loss remain challenges in the treatment with straight-wire appliances. Trial registration DRKS, DRKS00024350. Registered 15 February 2021, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00024350.
The purpose was to determine the effect of different environments (artificial saliva, human saliva, distilled water, dry storage) on frictional forces between various tribological systems made from self-ligating brackets in combination with stainless-steel wires (dimensions: 0.016″×0.022″, 0.018″×0.025″ and 0.019″×0.025″). An universal testing-machine applied a normal force of 1 N. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests (α=5%) were used. Saliva had significantly higher frictional forces (p<0.001). Yet, the influence of the media depends on the wire dimensions. The results were not as straightforward as in 0.018″×0.025″, which had a clear order (dry storage
Background: The clinical outcome of aligner therapy is closely related to the precision of its setup, which can be manually or digitally fabricated. The aim of the study is to investigate the suitability of manual setups made for aligner therapy in terms of the precision of tooth movements. Methods: Six dental technicians were instructed to adjust each of eleven duplicate plaster casts of a patient models as follows: a 1 mm pure vestibular translation of tooth 11 and a 15° pure mesial rotation of tooth 23. The processed setup models were 3D scanned and matched with the reference model. The one-sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p < 0.05) was used for evaluation. Results: The overall precision of the translational movement covers a wide range of values from 0.25 to 2.26 mm (median: 1.09 mm). The target value for the rotation of tooth 23 was achieved with a median rotation of 9.76° in the apical-occlusal direction. Unwanted movements in the other planes also accompanied the rotation. Conclusions: A manual setup can only be fabricated with limited precision. Besides the very high variability between technicians, additional unwanted movements in other spatial planes occurred. Manually fabricated setups should not be favored for aligner therapy due to limited precision.
Background: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate and follow up a conservative treatment approach with functional orthodontic appliances for the management of mandibular condyle fractures in children and adolescent patients. Methods: Between 2020 and 2022, the treatment records of patients with mandibular condyle fractures receiving a functional orthodontic treatment (FOT) were evaluated. In addition to the clinical and functional findings, magnetic resonance images of the mandibular condyles and surrounding structures were assessed. Results: Out of 61 patients, 8 met the inclusion criteria. The follow-up examination records showed no functional limitations. In 75% of cases, mild midline deviations persisted (mean 1.1 mm) without significant alterations to the occlusal relationships. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed the remodeling of the condyles and the restitution of the ramus heights, even in dislocated and displaced fractures. In three cases, a partial displacement of the articular disc was observed at the follow-up. No differences in the remodeling patterns were noted depending on age, sex, or fracture location. Conclusions: A FOT led to favorable functional and morphologic outcomes, supporting the concept of a conservative functional approach in children and adolescent patients. Functional adjunctive therapy should be considered in the conservative treatment of mandibular condyle fractures in growing patients.
Purpose: To investigate the bracket transfer accuracy of the indirect bonding technique (IDB). Methods: Systematic search of the literature was conducted in PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus through November 2021. Selection Criteria: In vivo and ex vivo studies investigating bracket transfer accuracy by comparing the planned and achieved bracket positions using the IDB technique were considered. Information concerning patients, samples, and applied methodology was collected. Measured mean transfer errors (MTE) for angular and linear directions were extracted. Risk of bias (RoB) in the studies was assessed using a tailored RoB tool. Meta-analysis of ex vivo studies was performed for overall linear and angular bracket transfer accuracy and for subgroup analyses by type of tray, tooth groups, jaw-related, side-related, and by assessment method. Results: A total of 16 studies met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review. The overall linear mean transfer errors (MTE) in mesiodistal, vertical and buccolingual direction were 0.08 mm (95% CI 0.05; 0.10), 0.09 mm (0.06; 0.11), 0.14 mm (0.10; 0.17), respectively. The overall angular mean transfer errors (MTE) regarding angulation, rotation, torque were 1.13° (0.75; 1.52), 0.93° (0.49; 1.37), and 1.11° (0.68; 1.53), respectively. Silicone trays showed the highest accuracy, followed by vacuum-formed trays and 3D printed trays. Subgroup analyses between tooth groups, right and left sides, and upper and lower jaw showed minor differences. Conclusions and implications: The overall accuracy of the indirect bonding technique can be considered clinically acceptable. Future studies should address the validation of the accuracy assessment methods used.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.