OBJECTIVE: The placement of orthodontic bands usually increases plaque accumulation due to numerous mechanical retention sites. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the amount and distribution pattern of biofilm in the oral (palatal and lingual) and interproximal regions surrounding orthodontic bands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the formation of biofilm on 32 orthodontic bands which had been placed intraorally for 6-37 months. Two parameters were measured: the percentage of surface covered by biofilm (quantity) and the biofilm distribution pattern of accumulation. We measured these two parameters in four regions of interest: the mesial and distal interproximal regions, as well as the mesial and distal regions of the oral attachment. RESULTS: The quantity of biofilm formation was similar in all four regions of interest, ranging from 13.3% to 16.8%. In contrast to biofilm quantity, distribution patterns differed in the four regions. In the mesial and distal interproximal regions it appeared as extensive insular areas in 87.5% and 71.9%, respectively, whereas it appeared more often supragingival and linear in nature in regions adjacent to the oral attachment, i.e. in 65.6% and 68.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that firstly, oral hygiene in the palatal and lingual regions of orthodontic bands seems as difficult as it is in the interproximal areas, thus requiring thorough hygiene in both areas. Secondly, orthodontic patients with a history of periodontal disease require special attention regarding the use of orthodontic bands.
OBJECTIVE: The placement of orthodontic bands usually increases plaque accumulation due to numerous mechanical retention sites. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the amount and distribution pattern of biofilm in the oral (palatal and lingual) and interproximal regions surrounding orthodontic bands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the formation of biofilm on 32 orthodontic bands which had been placed intraorally for 6-37 months. Two parameters were measured: the percentage of surface covered by biofilm (quantity) and the biofilm distribution pattern of accumulation. We measured these two parameters in four regions of interest: the mesial and distal interproximal regions, as well as the mesial and distal regions of the oral attachment. RESULTS: The quantity of biofilm formation was similar in all four regions of interest, ranging from 13.3% to 16.8%. In contrast to biofilm quantity, distribution patterns differed in the four regions. In the mesial and distal interproximal regions it appeared as extensive insular areas in 87.5% and 71.9%, respectively, whereas it appeared more often supragingival and linear in nature in regions adjacent to the oral attachment, i.e. in 65.6% and 68.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that firstly, oral hygiene in the palatal and lingual regions of orthodontic bands seems as difficult as it is in the interproximal areas, thus requiring thorough hygiene in both areas. Secondly, orthodontic patients with a history of periodontal disease require special attention regarding the use of orthodontic bands.
Authors: M Paolantonio; F Festa; G di Placido; M D'Attilio; G Catamo; R Piccolomini Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: W Heuer; C Elter; A Demling; A Neumann; S Suerbaum; M Hannig; T Heidenblut; F W Bach; M Stiesch-Scholz Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.837
Authors: A Demling; W Heuer; C Elter; T Heidenblut; Fr-W Bach; R Schwestka-Polly; M Stiesch-Scholz Journal: Eur J Orthod Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 3.075