OBJECTIVE: To analyze the forces released by four types of passive stainless steel self-ligating brackets (SLBs), and by two nonconventional elastomeric ligature-bracket systems when compared with conventional elastomeric ligatures on conventional stainless steel brackets during the alignment of apically displaced teeth at the maxillary arch. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental model consisting of five brackets was used to assess the forces released by the seven different ligature-bracket systems with 0.012'' or 0.014'' superelastic nickel titanium wire in the presence of different amounts of apical displacement of the canine (ranging from 1.5 mm to 6 mm). Comparisons between the different types of bracket/wire/ ligature systems were carried out by means of ANOVA on ranks with Dunnett's post hoc test (P < .05). RESULTS: When correction of a misalignment greater than 3 mm is attempted, a noticeable amount of force for alignment is generated by passive SLBs and nonconventional elastomeric ligature-bracket systems, and a null amount of force is released in the presence of conventional elastomeric ligatures on conventional brackets. CONCLUSIONS: When minimal apical displacement is needed (1.5 mm), the differences in performance between low-friction and conventional systems are minimal. These differences become significant when correction of a misalignment of greater than 3.0 mm is attempted.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the forces released by four types of passive stainless steel self-ligating brackets (SLBs), and by two nonconventional elastomeric ligature-bracket systems when compared with conventional elastomeric ligatures on conventional stainless steel brackets during the alignment of apically displaced teeth at the maxillary arch. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental model consisting of five brackets was used to assess the forces released by the seven different ligature-bracket systems with 0.012'' or 0.014'' superelastic nickel titanium wire in the presence of different amounts of apical displacement of the canine (ranging from 1.5 mm to 6 mm). Comparisons between the different types of bracket/wire/ ligature systems were carried out by means of ANOVA on ranks with Dunnett's post hoc test (P < .05). RESULTS: When correction of a misalignment greater than 3 mm is attempted, a noticeable amount of force for alignment is generated by passive SLBs and nonconventional elastomeric ligature-bracket systems, and a null amount of force is released in the presence of conventional elastomeric ligatures on conventional brackets. CONCLUSIONS: When minimal apical displacement is needed (1.5 mm), the differences in performance between low-friction and conventional systems are minimal. These differences become significant when correction of a misalignment of greater than 3.0 mm is attempted.
Authors: Maria Regina Guerra Monteiro; Licinio Esmeraldo da Silva; Carlos Nelson Elias; Oswaldo de Vasconcellos Vilella Journal: J Appl Oral Sci Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 2.698
Authors: Graziane Olímpio Pereira; Carla Maria Melleiro Gimenez; Lucas Prieto; Marcos Gabriel do Lago Prieto; Roberta Tarkany Basting Journal: Dental Press J Orthod Date: 2016 Jul-Aug
Authors: Steyner de Lima Mendonça; Otávio José Praxedes Neto; Patricia Teixeira de Oliveira; Patricia Bittencourt Dutra dos Santos; Fábio Henrique de Sá Leitão Pinheiro Journal: Dental Press J Orthod Date: 2014 Jan-Feb