No abstract

No abstract

Objective: To test the null hypotheses that at clinically relevant amounts of applied moment, there are no differences in the amount of resistance to sliding (RS) between self-ligating (SL) and conventionally ligated (CL) brackets on both stainless steel (SS) and nickel-titanium (NT) archwire. Materials and Methods: Three different SL brackets and one CL bracket, all 0.0220 slot, were tested on a custom-built device to simulate canine retraction mechanics in the second-order dimension. The setup allowed for simultaneous and continuous measurement of RS and applied moment at the bracket-archwire interface. The brackets tested were Damon3, In-Ovation R, Smartclip, and Victory, all of which were tested with 0.0190 3 0.0250 SS and NT archwires. The RS at calculated moments of 2000 g-mm and 4000 g-mm was determined and compared between the various brackets and both archwire types. Descriptive measures, analysis of variance, and TukeyKramer post-test comparisons were used to calculate results. Results: All brackets displayed a greater amount of RS with NT than with SS archwires. At the higher moment levels (4000 g-mm), no significant reduction in RS was found between CL and SL brackets on both SS and NT archwires. At lower levels of applied moment (2000 g-mm), reductions in RS of 18% (42.7 g) and 18% (38.5 g) were found between the CL bracket and the best performing SL bracket on NT and SS, respectively. Conclusion: At low values of applied moment, some statistical differences were found; however, in general, the differences in RS amongst the various SL and CL brackets tested may not be clinically relevant. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:794-799.)

Objective: To determine the effect of mode of ligation and bracket material on resistance to sliding (RS) by comparing various esthetic brackets of conventionally ligated and self-ligating (SL) designs under an increasing applied moment in the second-order dimension. Materials and Methods: Eight different commercially available esthetic brackets of SL and conventional elastomeric-ligated (CL) designs were mounted on a testing apparatus to simulate canine retraction using sliding mechanics and the application of a moment on 0. . The RS at calculated moments of 2000 g-mm and 4000 g-mm was determined and compared between the various brackets. Descriptive measures and one-way analysis of variance were used to calculate means and statistical differences among the bracket types. Results: The CL monocrystalline bracket displayed significantly greater (P , .05) RS than all other brackets tested. Among the other brackets, the range of RS values was 145.8-191.7 g and 291.9-389.2 g at moments of 2000 g-mm and 4000 g-mm, respectfully, though these differences were not significant (P , .05). All brackets tested displayed greater levels of RS (P , .05) at 4000 g-mm than at 2000 g-mm.Conclusion: With the exception of the CL monocrystalline bracket, all brackets displayed comparable amounts of RS regardless of mode of ligation or bracket slot material. (Angle Orthod. 2014;84:134-139.)

Objectives To assess factors that may be associated with buccal bone changes adjacent to maxillary first molars after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fixed appliance therapy. Materials and Methods Pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) cone-beam computed tomography scans were obtained from 45 patients treated with RME and preadjusted edgewise appliances. Buccal alveolar bone thickness was measured adjacent to the mesiobuccal root of the maxillary first molar 4 mm, 6 mm, and 8 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction, and anatomic defects were recorded. Paired and unpaired t-tests were used to compare alveolar bone thickness at T1 and T2 and to determine whether teeth with posttreatment anatomic defects had thinner initial bone. Correlation analyses were used to examine relationships between buccal alveolar bone thickness changes and amount of expansion, initial bone thickness, age at T1, postexpansion retention time, and treatment time. Results There was a statistically significant reduction in buccal alveolar bone thickness from T1 to T2. Approximately half (47.7%) of the teeth developed anatomic defects from T1 to T2. These teeth had significantly thinner buccal bone at T1. Reduction in alveolar bone thickness was correlated with only one tested variable: initial bone thickness. Conclusions RME and fixed-appliance therapy can be associated with significant reduction in buccal alveolar bone thickness and an increase in anatomic defects adjacent to the expander anchor teeth. Anchor teeth with greater initial buccal bone thickness have less reduction in buccal bone thickness and are less likely to develop posttreatment anatomic defects of buccal bone.