Literature DB >> 26843751

Comparative evaluation of anchorage loss between self-ligating appliance and Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise appliance using sliding mechanics - A retrospective study.

Pankaj Juneja1, G Shivaprakash2, S S Chopra3, P B Kambalyal4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although a number of studies have been undertaken to evaluate the friction characteristics of self-ligating brackets, there have been only few studies which have actually evaluated the clinical efficiency of these self-ligating brackets. This study was done to evaluate the clinical efficiency of Passive SLB (Smart Clip) in terms of anchorage loss and total treatment duration by comparing it with a Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise (M.B.T.) bracket system.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study in which the study sample comprised of ten patients treated with Passive SLB (Smart Clip, 0.022″) and ten patients treated with Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise (M.B.T.) bracket system (0.022″) who required therapeutic extraction of U/L first premolars as a part of their orthodontic treatment plan. Pretreatment and post treatment lateral cephalograms were taken to evaluate the amount of anchorage loss. The total time required to complete the treatment was also recorded.
RESULTS: Anchorage loss observed with Passive SLB (Smart Clip) sagittally was 1.90 ± 0.68 mm in the maxilla and 1.90 ± 0.43 mm in the mandible and vertically was 0.52 ± 0.53 mm in the maxilla and 0.70 ± 0.69 mm in the mandible. Anchorage loss observed with Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise (M.B.T.) bracket system sagittally was 2.08 ± 0.43 mm in the maxilla and 1.95 ± 0.44 mm in the mandible and vertically was 0.50 ± 0.49 mm in the maxilla and 0.68 ± 0.53 mm in the mandible. The average time taken for the completion of treatment in Passive SLB (Smart Clip) and Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise (M.B.T.) bracket system was 14.0 ± 2.4 and 17.2 ± 2.6 months respectively.
CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in the quantum of anchor loss between Smart Clip self-ligating bracket system and Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise (M.B.T.) bracket system although Smart Clip self-ligating bracket system is efficient in reducing the overall treatment time.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anchorage loss; M.B.T. bracket system; Smart Clip self-ligating bracket system

Year:  2014        PMID: 26843751      PMCID: PMC4705177          DOI: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2014.01.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India        ISSN: 0377-1237


  27 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.  Friction in perspective.

Authors:  S Braun; M Bluestein; B K Moore; G Benson
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Anchorage loss--a multifactorial response.

Authors:  Silvia Geron; Nir Shpack; Samouil Kandos; Moshe Davidovitch; Alexander D Vardimon
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  The effect of ligation method on friction in sliding mechanics.

Authors:  Max Hain; Ashish Dhopatkar; Peter Rock
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  Titanium implant anchorage in orthodontic treatment an experimental investigation in monkeys.

Authors:  S Linder-Aronson; A Nordenram; G Anneroth
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 6.  Systematic review of self-ligating brackets.

Authors:  Stephanie Shih-Hsuan Chen; Geoffrey Michael Greenlee; Jihyun-Elizabeth Kim; Craig L Smith; Greg J Huang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  Anchorage control during leveling and aligning with a preadjusted appliance system.

Authors:  R P McLaughlin; J C Bennett
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  1991-11

Review 8.  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

9.  A comparative in vitro study of the frictional characteristics of two types of self-ligating brackets and two types of pre-adjusted edgewise brackets tied with elastomeric ligatures.

Authors:  S Thomas; M Sherriff; D Birnie
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Randomized clinical trial of orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional fixed orthodontic appliances.

Authors:  Padhraig S Fleming; Andrew T DiBiase; Robert T Lee
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.650

View more
  1 in total

1.  Does anchorage loss differ with 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems?

Authors:  Yassir A Yassir; Grant T McIntyre; Ahmed M El-Angbawi; David R Bearn
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 2.079

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.