Nano-silver and nano-titanium oxide films can be coated over brackets in order to reduce bacterial aggregation and friction. However, their antimicrobial efficacy, surface roughness, and frictional resistance are not assessed before. Fifty-five stainless-steel brackets were divided into 5 groups of 11 brackets each: uncoated brackets, brackets coated with 60 µm silver, 100 µm silver, 60 µm titanium, and 100 µm titanium. Coating was performed using physical vapor deposition method. For friction test, three brackets from each group were randomly selected and tested. For scanning electron microscopy and atomic-force microscopy assessments, one and one brackets were selected from each group. For antibacterial assessment, six brackets were selected from each group. Of them, three were immediately subjected to direct contact with S. mutans. Colonies were counted 3, 6, 24, and 48 h of contact. The other three were stored in water for 3 months. Then were subjected to a similar direct contact test. Results pertaining to both subgroups were combined. Groups were compared statistically. Mean (SD) friction values of the groups 'control, silver-60, silver-100, titanium-60, and titanium-100' were 0.55 ± 0.14, 0.77 ± 0.08, 0.82 ± 0.11, 1.52 ± 0.24, and 1.57 ± 0.41 N, respectively (p = .0004, Kruskal-Wallis). Titanium frictions were significantly greater than control (p < .05), but silver groups were not (p > .05, Dunn). In the uncoated group, colony count increased exponentially within 48 h. The coated groups showed significant reductions in colony count (p < .05, two-way-repeated-measures ANOVA). In conclusions, all four explained coatings reduce surface roughness and bacterial growth. Nano-titanium films are not suitable for friction reduction. Nano-silver results were not conclusive and need future larger studies.

Aims of the present study was to measure frictional resistance between silver coated brackets and different types of arch wires, and shear bond strength of these brackets to the tooth. In an experimental clinical research 28 orthodontic brackets (standard, 22 slots) were coated with silver ions using electroplate method. Six brackets (coated: 3, uncoated: 3) were evaluated with Scanning Electron Microscopy and Atomic Force Microscopy. The amount of friction in 15 coated brackets was measured with three different kinds of arch wires (0.019 × 0.025-in stainless steel [SS], 0.018-in stainless steel [SS], 0.018-in Nickel-Titanium [Ni-Ti]) and compared with 15 uncoated steel brackets. In addition, shear bond strength values were compared between 10 brackets with silver coating and 10 regular brackets. Universal testing machine was used to measure shear bond strength and the amount of friction between the wires and brackets. SPSS 18 was used for data analysis with t-test. SEM and AFM results showed deposition of a uniform layer of silver, measuring 8-10 μm in thickness on bracket surfaces. Silver coating led to higher frictional forces in all the three types of arch wires, which was statistically significant in 0.019 × 0.025-in SS and 0.018-in Ni-Ti, but it did not change the shear bond strength significantly. Silver coating with electroplating method did not affect the bond strength of the bracket to enamel; in addition, it was not an effective method for decreasing friction in sliding mechanics.

Background Long-term retention with fixed retainers with a high success rate seems to be a reasonable solution to minimize or prohibit relapse of orthodontic treatment. Methods Two hundred sixty patients between 13 and 30 years old were recruited for this study. The 0.0175 stainless steel twisted wire (G&H Orthodontics, USA) was compared with a single-strand ribbon titanium lingual retainer wire (Retainium, Reliance orthodontics, USA) was used. When treatment was completed, the retainers were bonded from canine to canine in the mandibular arch of the participants. In the follow-up visits, the patients were recalled every 3 months during the 24 months. Detachments, the time of debonding, and side effects were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed by a blinded statistician using a statistical package for Social Science (SPSS, Version20). After descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to measure the survival rates of each retainer. P value < 0.05 was considered as significant. Results Finally, 138 patients who received twisted wire splint and 112 patients who received ribbon wire were included in the analysis. The average duration of success was about 23 months for twisted wire and ribbon wire, according to the Kaplan-Meier estimates. The analysis showed no significant overall difference between the treatments (p = 0.13). Failure rates in terms of detachments in all groups occurred at the enamel junction, and it was 25 in twisted retainer group (18.1%) and was 10 in ribbon retainer group (8.9%); the Kaplan-Meier analysis test detected a significant difference in the failure rates between the groups (p = 0/006). Conclusions Although the conventional twisted stainless steel wire and single-strand titanium flat metal ribbon wire as fixed orthodontic retainers have the same clinical effects, it was shown that the ribbon wire has less failure in terms of detachments.

Purpose:The aim of this study was to compare frictional forces between monocrystalline alumina (MA), polycrystalline alumina (PA), and stainless steel (SS) brackets with two SS wires: Rectangular and round.Materials and Methods:In this in vitro study, 60 0.022 brackets [20 PA (0° torque, Forestadent, Germany) and 20 MA (0° torque, Ormco, California, USA)] brackets plus 20 SS brackets (0° torque, Foretadent, Germany) and 60 SS archwires (30 rectangular 0.019 ×0.025 archwires and 30 round 0.018 archwires, Ortho Technology, USA) were used in subgroups of 10 from the combination of all brackets and all archwires. A universal testing machine (Instron, Model STM 250, Germany) was used to investigate the static frictional resistance. The angulation between the bracket and wire was 0°, and the wires were pulled through the slots at a crosshead speed of 10 mm/min. Two-way and one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests were used to analyze the data.Results:Mean (SD) static frictional force for each group was as follows: MA + round: 3.47 (0.38); MA + rectangular: 4.05 (0.47); PA + round: 4.14 (0.37); PA + rectangular: 4.45 (0.65); SS + round: 3.28 (0.22); and SS + rectangular: 4.22 (0.61). Significant effects of bracket types (P = 0.001) and archwire types (P = 0.000) on the friction force were detected using ANOVA. Tukey test indicated significant differences between PA brackets with both SS and MA brackets (P < 0.05), but not between SS and MA brackets. The two archwires as well had significantly different effects (Tukey P = 0.000).Conclusions:Based on the present in-vitro study, the PA brackets might create higher frictional forces compared to both SS and MA brackets. The rectangular 0.019 ×0.025 archwire might create greater forces than round 0.018 archwire.

IntroductionAdult patients typically require high-quality orthodontic treatment for ceramic brackets, but some clinicians remain concerned about the bond strength of these brackets. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the shear bond strength and de-bonding characteristics of metallic and ceramic brackets bonded with two types of bonding agents.MethodsIn an experimental study done in 2013 in Babol, Iran, 120 extracted human maxillary premolar teeth were randomly divided into four groups as follows: HM group: metallic bracket/conventional bonding agent; SM group: metallic bracket/Transbond self-etching primer; HC group: ceramic bracket/conventional bonding agent; SC group: ceramic bracket/Transbond self-etching primer. Twenty-four hours after thermocycling (1000 cycle, 5 °C–55 °C), the shear bond strength values were measured. The amount of resin remaining on the tooth surface (adhesive remnant index: ARI) was determined under a stereomicroscope. Enamel detachment index was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope. To perform statistical analysis, ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, and Tukey post-hoc tests were applied. The level of significance was set at p <0.05.ResultsThe mean shear bond strength values (MPa ± SD) were group HM=12.59, group SM=11.15, group HC=7.7, and group SC=7.41. Bond strength differences between groups HM and SM (p=0.063) and between HC and SC (p=0.091) were not statistically significant. There were significant differences between HM and HC and between SM and SC groups (p < 0.05). Insignificant differences were found in ARI among all groups.ConclusionOur findings indicated that the metallic brackets had higher bond strengths in comparison with ceramic brackets. In addition, self-etching primer was able to produce fewer bonds compared with the conventional technique. Many samples showed the bracket-adhesive interface failure or failure inside the adhesive.