OBJECTIVE: To compare the magnitude of external apical root resorption (EARR) of incisors in patients undergoing the initial phase of orthodontic treatment with two sets of brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to the results of the power analysis for sample size calculation, 19 Angle Class I patients (anterior crowding: 3 to 5 mm; mean age: 20.6 years) were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups: group I (n = 11, self-ligating brackets) and group II (n = 8, conventional preadjusted brackets). The degree of EARR was detected in 152 upper and lower incisors by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and a three-dimensional program (Dolphin 11.5, Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif) with 25% level of sensitivity. The CBCT scans were obtained before (T1) and 6 months after initiation of treatment (T2). Differences between and within groups were analyzed by nonpaired and paired t-test, respectively, with 5% significance level. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for both groups between T1 and T2. However, no differences in the degree of EARR were detected between the groups studied. CONCLUSIONS: Although EARR has occurred in all teeth evaluated, the bracket design (self-ligating or conventional) did not demonstrate any influence on the results observed.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the magnitude of external apical root resorption (EARR) of incisors in patients undergoing the initial phase of orthodontic treatment with two sets of brackets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to the results of the power analysis for sample size calculation, 19 Angle Class I patients (anterior crowding: 3 to 5 mm; mean age: 20.6 years) were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups: group I (n = 11, self-ligating brackets) and group II (n = 8, conventional preadjusted brackets). The degree of EARR was detected in 152 upper and lower incisors by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and a three-dimensional program (Dolphin 11.5, Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif) with 25% level of sensitivity. The CBCT scans were obtained before (T1) and 6 months after initiation of treatment (T2). Differences between and within groups were analyzed by nonpaired and paired t-test, respectively, with 5% significance level. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for both groups between T1 and T2. However, no differences in the degree of EARR were detected between the groups studied. CONCLUSIONS: Although EARR has occurred in all teeth evaluated, the bracket design (self-ligating or conventional) did not demonstrate any influence on the results observed.
Authors: John F Sherrard; P Emile Rossouw; Byron W Benson; Roberto Carrillo; Peter H Buschang Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Belinda Weltman; Katherine W L Vig; Henry W Fields; Shiva Shanker; Eloise E Kaizar Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Marcio Rodrigues de Almeida; Cristina Futagami; Ana Cláudia de Castro Ferreira Conti; Paula Vanessa Pedron Oltramari-Navarro; Ricardo de Lima Navarro Journal: Dental Press J Orthod Date: 2015 May-Jun
Authors: Collin Jacobs; Philipp F Gebhardt; Viviana Jacobs; Marlene Hechtner; Dan Meila; Heinrich Wehrbein Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2014-01-23 Impact factor: 2.151