Orthodontic Treatment with Lingually Bonded Brackets

Sandham, J A

doi:10.1179/bjo.11.4.189

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It was in 1979 when Fujita published the first article on lingual appliance, a real progress for the orthodontic practice [ 1 ]. Adults and teenagers liked better this innovative and attractive appliance above all for its esthetics [ 2 ]. It was then assumed that this appliance provoked less white spot lesions or caries development than the conventional labial appliance with obvious esthetic implication for the patient, thanks to less plaque retention due to the mechanical cleaning of the tongue on the lingual surfaces of the teeth [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in the oral environment after placement of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances

Lombardo

Ortan

Gorgun³

et al. 2013

Prog Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis study compared the oral hygiene and caries risk of patients treated with labial and lingual orthodontic appliances throughout a prospective evaluation of the status of the oral environment before and after bracket placement.MethodsA total of 20 orthodontic patients aged 19 to 23 years were included in the study and were divided into two groups: 10 patients wore Roth labial appliance (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, WI, USA) and 10 patients wore STb lingual appliance (Ormco Corporation, Glendora, CA, USA). Plaque index (PI), gingival bleeding index (GBI), salivary flow rate, saliva buffer capacity, salivary pH, and Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus counts in saliva were determined at three time points: before orthodontic appliance placement (T0), 4 weeks after bonding (T1), and 8 weeks after bonding (T2). After appliance placement, all patients were periodically educated to the oral hygiene procedures. Wilcoxon rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine intragroup and intergroup differences as regards qualitative data. To compare quantitative data between the groups, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were undertaken, while intragroup differences were tested with McNemar test. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.ResultsStatistical analysis of the data obtained revealed a statistically significant difference between the data of T0 and T1 and the data of T0 and T2 of the PI scores and between T0 and T2 of the GBI scores in the group treated with the lingual appliance. The GBI value increased significantly between T0 and T1 but decreased significantly between T1 and T2 (p < 0.01) in the group treated with labial appliance. S. mutans counts increased significantly between T0 and T2 in the saliva samples of patients treated with lingual appliance. No statistically significant differences were found between S. mutans and Lactobacillus counts at the three terms of saliva collection in patients treated with labial appliance. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups at the three time points as regards the salivary flow rate and saliva buffer capacity.ConclusionsLingual and labial orthodontic appliances showed a different potential in modifying the investigated clinical parameters: patients wearing STb lingual orthodontic appliance had more plaque retention 4 and 8 weeks after bonding, while there were more gingival inflammation and more S. mutans counts 8 weeks after bonding. No differences were found between the two groups as regards the Lactobacillus counts, the salivary flow rate, and saliva buffer capacity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in the oral environment after placement of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances

Lombardo

Ortan

Gorgun³

et al. 2013

Prog Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1979 one of the first papers on the lingual placement of brackets for fixed orthodontic treatment was published (16). Lingual brackets were initially merely considered for esthetic reasons (17) and because of the extra costs involved are mostly used in the adult patient population (18, 19). The lingual placement of brackets may also have a positive effect on caries outcome.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Caries outcomes after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: do lingual brackets make a difference?

Veen

Attın

Schwestka-Polly

et al. 2010

European J Oral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances is considered a risk factor for the development of white spot caries lesions (WSL). Traditionally, brackets are bonded to the buccal surfaces. Lingual brackets are developing rapidly and have become more readily available. Buccal surfaces are considered to be more caries prone than lingual surfaces. Furthermore, lingual brackets are shaped to fit the morphology of the teeth and seal almost the entire surface. In the present study we tested the hypothesis that lingual brackets result in a lower caries incidence than buccal brackets. We tested this hypothesis using a split-mouth design where subjects were allocated randomly to a group receiving either buccal or lingual brackets on the maxillary teeth and the alternative bracket type in the mandible. The results indicate that buccal surfaces are more prone to WSL development, especially when WSL existed before treatment. The number of WSL that developed or progressed on buccal surfaces was 4.8 times higher than the number of WSL that developed or progressed on lingual surfaces. When measured using quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), the increase in integrated fluorescence loss was 10.6 times higher buccally than lingually. We conclude that lingual brackets make a difference when caries lesion incidence is concerned.

show abstract

“…Im Jahr 1979 wurde einer der ersten Artikel über die Platzierung von Brackets auf den Lingualflächen der Zähne zur Durchführung einer kieferorthopädischen Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen veröffentlicht [16]. Linguale Brackets wurden ursprünglich aus ästhetischen Gründen eingesetzt [17] und aufgrund der höheren Kosten auch hauptsächlich bei Erwachsenen verwendet [18,19]. Eine Platzierung von Brackets auf den Lingual flächen kann auch positive Auswirkungen auf die Entstehung von Karies haben.…”

Section: Abstract ▼unclassified

Karieshäufigkeit nach einer Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen: Machen linguale Brackets einen Unterschied?

Veen

Attın

Schwestka-Polly

et al. 2015

Inf Orthod Kieferorthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Eine kieferorthop?dische Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen gilt als Risikofaktor f?r die Entstehung von Initialkaries (White-Spot-L?sionen, WSL). Brackets werden traditionell auf die Bukkalfl?chen der Z?hne aufgesetzt. Linguale Brackets werden immer weiterentwickelt und sind inzwischen allgemein verf?gbar. Die Bukkalfl?chen der Z?hne gelten als kariesanf?lliger, als die Lingualfl?chen. Au?erdem sind linguale Brackets der Morphologie der Z?hne besser angepasst und sie bedecken fast die gesamten Zahnfl?chen. In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die Hypothese getestet, dass die Kariesh?ufigkeit bei lingualen Brackets geringer ist als bei bukkalen Brackets. Die Studie wurde im Split-Mouth-Design durchgef?hrt und die Patienten zuf?llig einer von 2 Gruppen zugewiesen. Im Oberkiefer wurden dabei entweder linguale oder bukkale Brackets verwendet und im Unterkiefer der jeweils andere Brackettyp. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass die Bukkalfl?chen der Z?hne anf?lliger f?r Karies sind, insbesondere dann, wenn White-Spot-L?sionen bereits vor Beginn einer kieferorthop?dischen Behandlung vorhanden sind. Die Anzahl der neu entstandenen oder weiter fortgeschrittenen White-Spot-L?sionen war auf den Bukkalfl?chen 4,8-mal h?her als auf den lingualen Zahnfl?chen. Der integrierte Fluoreszenzverlust, bestimmt anhand von quantitativen lichtinduzierten Fluoreszenzaufnahmen (QLF), war auf den bukkalen Zahnfl?chen 10,6-mal h?her als auf den Lingualfl?chen. Daraus schlie?en wir, dass linguale Brackets in Hinblick auf die Kariesh?ufigkeit eine echte Alternative darstellen.

show abstract

Orthodontic Treatment with Lingually Bonded Brackets

Cited by 4 publications

References 1 publication

Changes in the oral environment after placement of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances

Changes in the oral environment after placement of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances

Caries outcomes after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: do lingual brackets make a difference?

Karieshäufigkeit nach einer Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen: Machen linguale Brackets einen Unterschied?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About