Objective. Clinical comparison of the survival rates between stainless steel and ceramic brackets over a 12-month period. Materials and Methods. The study involved 20 consecutive patients with diagnosed malocclusion that required two-arch fixed appliance treatment. The participants were randomly divided into two 10-member groups. Group 1 was treated with Abzil Agile (3M Unitek) stainless steel brackets; group 2 was treated with Radiance (American Orthodontics) monocrystalline ceramic brackets. All the brackets were bonded by the same operator. Over the next 12 months, all bracket failures were recorded with each appointment. The received data were processed statistically using the Mantel–Cox test, Kaplan–Meier method, and Cox hazard model. Results. A total of 381 brackets were bonded, 195 of which were metallic brackets and 186 were ceramic ones. In the 12-month observation period, there were 14 metal (7.2%) and 2 ceramic bracket (1.1%) failures. The overall failure rate was 4.2% (n = 16). The majority of failures (14 brackets; 87.5%) occurred during the first 6 months of the experiment, 12 (83%) of which were metal brackets and 2 (100%) were ceramic brackets. The statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the groups (p<0.05). Conclusions. Metal brackets demonstrated significantly higher failure rates than ceramic brackets for both 6- and 12-month observation periods (p<0.05). The 6% difference between the brackets is clinically significant as it corresponds to one additional failure within 12 months.

BackgroundCleft lip and/or palate is the most frequent congenital abnormality occurring in the craniofacial region and is often associated with numerous dental defects such as tooth agenesis, supernumerary teeth, microdontia, taurodontism, crown malformations, or delay in eruption. The prevalence of hypodontia in cleft-affected patients is much higher in comparison with a healthy population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of second premolar hypodontia in patients with cleft lip and/or palate.Material/MethodsWe performed a retrospective, evaluation of panoramic radiographs and dental casts in the Department of Dentofacial Orthopeadics and Orthodontics, Wroclaw Medical University. Two independent observers evaluated the records of 469 patients with various types of clefts and analyzed dental casts and panoramic radiographs.Results202 individuals met inclusion criteria. The sample comprised 120 UCLP patients, 38 BCLP patients, 28 CP patients, and 17 CLA patients. Hypodontia in the premolar region was observed in 39 individuals (19.3%). A total number of 58 second premolars were missing, of which 35 were maxillary second premolars (U5) and 23 were mandibular second premolars (L5).ConclusionsEstimated hypodontia in the Polish CL/P sample was considerably higher than the hypodontia in permanent dentition reported for a European healthy population. The number of congenitally missing second premolars was higher in the maxillary arch than in the mandibular.