Literature DB >> 21208085

Active and passive self-ligation-a myth?

Lorenz M Brauchli1, Christiane Senn, Andrea Wichelhaus.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the frictional behavior of several self-ligating brackets with that of normal brackets both with and without tipping force-moments and in combination with different archwire dimensions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The resistance to sliding (RS) of seven self-ligating brackets, a conventional bracket, and a ceramic bracket with a low-friction clip were evaluated in combination with three different archwires and tipping force-moments of 0 and 10 Nmm. The center of rotation for the measurements was set within the center of the bracket or with a 10-mm offset. Resistance to sliding was measured using an Instron 3344 at a cross-head speed of 10 mm/min at a temperature of 36°C.
RESULTS: Without a tipping moment, RS increased with the active self-ligating brackets with increasing archwire size. No RS was found for any of the passive self-ligating brackets. The 10-Nmm tipping moment resulted in more RS and was similar for all bracket and archwire combinations. RS was approximately doubled when the center of rotation was located at the bracket rather than with a 10-mm offset.
CONCLUSIONS: RS between brackets and archwires is highly dependent on the experimental setup. Different setups can result in contradictory results. Almost 1 N of traction force is lost in RS when a moment of 10 Nmm is placed at a rotational center 10 mm from the bracket.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21208085      PMCID: PMC8925263          DOI: 10.2319/041310-205.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  22 in total

1.  An ex-vivo investigation into the effect of bracket displacement on the resistance to sliding.

Authors:  D O'Reilly; P A Dowling; L Lagerstrom; M L Swartz
Journal:  Br J Orthod       Date:  1999-09

2.  Resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets versus conventional stainless steel twin brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet (saliva) states.

Authors:  G A Thorstenson; R P Kusy
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Frictional resistance of ceramic and stainless steel orthodontic brackets.

Authors:  D H Pratten; K Popli; N Germane; J C Gunsolley
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  SmartClip versus conventional twin brackets for initial alignment: is there a difference?

Authors:  Peter G Miles
Journal:  Aust Orthod J       Date:  2005-11

5.  Self-ligating vs conventional brackets in the treatment of mandibular crowding: a prospective clinical trial of treatment duration and dental effects.

Authors:  Nikolaos Pandis; Argy Polychronopoulou; Theodore Eliades
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.650

6.  Efficiency of mandibular arch alignment with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances.

Authors:  Padhraig S Fleming; Andrew T DiBiase; Grammati Sarri; Robert T Lee
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.650

Review 7.  Frictional resistance in self-ligating orthodontic brackets and conventionally ligated brackets. A systematic review.

Authors:  Sayeh Ehsani; Marie-Alice Mandich; Tarek H El-Bialy; Carlos Flores-Mir
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 8.  Friction between different wire-bracket configurations and materials.

Authors:  R P Kusy; J Q Whitley
Journal:  Semin Orthod       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 0.970

9.  Frictional forces in fixed appliances.

Authors:  D C Tidy
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 2.650

10.  Self-ligating vs conventional twin brackets during en-masse space closure with sliding mechanics.

Authors:  Peter G Miles
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.650

View more
  6 in total

1.  Photoelastic analysis of stress generated by wires when conventional and self-ligating brackets are used: a pilot study.

Authors:  Guilherme Caiado Sobral; Mário Vedovello Filho; Viviane Veroni Degan; Milton Santamaria
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct

2.  An interview with Nigel Harradine.

Authors:  Nigel Harradine; Ricardo Moresca; Weber Ursi; John Pobanz; Mauricio Accorsi
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug

3.  In vitro comparative study on the friction of stainless steel wires with and without Orthospeed® (JAL 90458) on an inclined plane.

Authors:  Juan J Alió-Sanz; Miguel Claros-Stucchi; Alberto Albaladejo; Carmen Iglesias-Conde; Alfonso Alvarado-Lorenzo
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2016-04-01

4.  Effect of passive self-ligating bracket placement on the posterior teeth on reduction of frictional force in sliding mechanics.

Authors:  Kyu-Ry Kim; Seung-Hak Baek
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 1.372

5.  Clinical effects with customized brackets and CAD/CAM technology: a prospective controlled study.

Authors:  Julia Hegele; Lena Seitz; Cora Claussen; Uwe Baumert; Hisham Sabbagh; Andrea Wichelhaus
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 2.750

6.  Role of lubricants on friction between self-ligating brackets and archwires.

Authors:  Renata C Leal; Flávia L B Amaral; Fabiana M G França; Roberta T Basting; Cecilia P Turssi
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.079

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.