La technique linguale straight wire

Takemoto, Kyoto; Scuzzo, Giuseppe; Lombardo, Luca; Takemoto, Y U I

doi:10.1016/s1761-7227(09)73507-7

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, as the wire distance to the lingual brackets decreases, the thickness of the composite resin, probability of bracket debonding, patient discomfort, and interference with the opposing arch teeth decrease. 3 Second, as the distance of the bracket to the center of tooth resistance changes, the force vectors and moments applied to the teeth are altered, especially in terms of torque, intrusion, and extrusion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This vertical discrepancy was significant for maxillary premolars and second molars. However, considering the conventional method for lingual bracket setup in straight-wire lingual orthodontics, 3 the brackets would be placed in the correct vertical position without any discrepancy. In straight-wire lingual orthodontics, following ideal setup, all the brackets (virtual or actual) would be attached to the selected full-size straight wire.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lingual straight-wire systems have many advantages because arch coordination can be achieved easily by using sliding mechanics. 3 However, tooth configuration on the lingual side has many variations and adapting a straight wire to the lingual curves requires composite resin compensation on the base of the brackets. 4 In addition, incorrect positioning of brackets in lingual straight-wire systems can cause undesired rotation, tipping, linguoversion/buccoversion, intrusion/extrusion, and torque.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe 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.MethodsThis 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 (α = 0.05).ResultsThe 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).ConclusionsThe results demonstrated that the gingival placement of lingual brackets on the anterior teeth could decrease the distance between a tooth and the straight wire.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the study emphasises some known facts and proven hypothesis like correlation of the stiffness archwire with its cross section (rectangular or round), its dimension and its alloy, our research shows that: Lingual straight archwires should be preferred during frictional space closure by virtue of their major stiffness, capable to take under control bow side effects. Moreover, they also simplified the job of orthodontic practitioners, making arch coordination less difficult and simpler sliding mechanics possible, as well as reducing chair-side time [ 6 , 26 ]. Lingual straight archwires should be preferred specially in the maxillary arch where we registered an important statistical differences for all the couple of wires compared.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lingual straight archwires should be preferred during frictional space closure by virtue of their major stiffness, capable to take under control bow side effects. Moreover, they also simplified the job of orthodontic practitioners, making arch coordination less difficult and simpler sliding mechanics possible, as well as reducing chair-side time [ 6 , 26 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stiffness comparison of mushroom and straight SS and TMA lingual archwires

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to investigate the relative stiffness of straight and mushroom lingual archwires of different diameters, cross sections and alloys, plotting their load/deflection graphs and using a modified three-point bending test.MethodsFujita’s mushroom archwires and straight lingual archwires of different diameters, cross sections and alloys were derived by a virtual set-up of an equal malocclusion and were cut at their straight distal portion. These distal portions were tested using a modified three-point bending test by an Instron 4467 dynamometer and the forces, were exerted at 1-mm deflection and were compared on each resulting load/deflection curve by means of ANOVA (p < 0.05).ResultsAll upper lingual mushroom wires exerted significantly lower forces than the straight wire. Lower mushroom archwires were stiffer than their upper counterparts, which were longer and featured inset bends. In the lower arch, similar levels of forces were recorded for the two types of wire. Load-deflection curves were higher for the straight wires, and stiffness increased proportionally with their diameter.ConclusionsThe stiffness of an archwire is a function of its diameter, length and the alloy it is made from. In lower lingual wires, there is little difference in stiffness between mushroom and straight wires, but in upper wires, the straight version is considerably stiffer. The greater bearing effect exhibited by the straight wire in the working and finishing phases makes it less susceptible to bowing effect and therefore preferable for sliding mechanics during en masse retraction, particularly in the upper arch.

show abstract