Alignment efficiency of Damon3 self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems: A randomized clinical trial

被引:134
|
作者
Scott, Paul [2 ]
DiBiase, Andrew T. [2 ]
Sherriff, Martyn [3 ]
Cobourne, Martyn T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Kings Coll London, Inst Dent, Dept Orthodont & Craniofacial Dev, London SE1 9RT, England
[2] E Kent Hosp NHS Trust, Dept Orthodont, London, England
[3] Kings Coll London, Dept Biomat, Inst Dent, London SE1 9RT, England
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.018
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of mandibular tooth alignment and the clinical effectiveness of a self-ligating and a conventional preadjusted edgewise orthodontic bracket system. Methods: A multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 2 orthodontic clinics. Sixty-two subjects (32 male, 30 female; mean age, 16.27 years) with mandibular incisor irregularities of 5 to 12 mm and a prescribed extraction pattern including the mandibular first premolars were randomly allocated to treatment with Damon3 self-ligating (Ormco, Glendora, Calif) or Synthesis (Ormco) conventionally ligated brackets. Fully ligated 0.014-in nickel-titanium archwires were used first in both groups, followed by a sequence of 0.014 x 0.025-in and 0.018 x 0.025-in nickel-titanium, and 0.019 x 0.025-in stainless steel. Study casts were taken at the start of treatment (T1), the first archwire change (T2), and the placement of the final 0.019 x 0.025-in archwire (T3). Cephalometric lateral skull and long-cone periapical radiographs of the mandibular incisors were taken at T1 and T3. Results: No significant difference was noted (P >0.05) in initial rate of alignment for either bracket system. Initial irregularity influenced subsequent rate of movement, but sex, age, and appliance type were statistically insignificant. Alignment was associated with an increase in intercanine width, a reduction in arch length, and proclination of the mandibular incisors for both appliances, but the differences were not significant. Incisor root resorption was not clinically significant and did not differ between systems. Conclusions: Damon3 self-ligating brackets are no more efficient than conventional ligated preadjusted brackets during tooth alignment. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:470.e1-470.e8)
引用
收藏
页码:470.e1 / 470.e8
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Initial orthodontic alignment effectiveness with self-ligating and conventional appliances: A network meta-analysis in practice
    Pandis, Nikolaos
    Fleming, Padhraig S.
    Spineli, Loukia M.
    Salanti, Georgia
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2014, 145 (04) : S152 - S163
  • [22] Leveling and alignment time and the periodontal status in patients with severe upper crowding treated by corticotomy-assisted self-ligating brackets in comparison with conventional or self-ligating brackets only: a 3-arm randomized controlled clinical trial
    Al-Ibrahim, Heba M.
    Hajeer, Mohammad Y.
    Alkhouri, Issam
    Zinah, Eiad
    JOURNAL OF THE WORLD FEDERATION OF ORTHODONTISTS, 2022, 11 (01) : 3 - 11
  • [23] A comparative anchorage control study between conventional and self-ligating bracket systems using differential moments
    de Almeida, Marcio Rodrigues
    Herrero, Francisco
    Fattal, Amine
    Davoody, Amirparviz R.
    Nanda, Ravindra
    Uribe, Flavio
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 2013, 83 (06) : 937 - 942
  • [24] Mandibular changes during initial alignment with SmartClip self-ligating and conventional brackets: A single-center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial
    Celikoglu, Mevlut
    Bayram, Mehmet
    Nur, Metin
    Kilkis, Dogan
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2015, 45 (02) : 89 - 94
  • [25] Clinical and microbiological parameters in patients with self-ligating and conventional brackets during early phase of orthodontic treatment
    Pejda, Slavica
    Varga, Marina Lapter
    Milosevic, Sandra Anic
    Mestrovic, Senka
    Slaj, Martina
    Repic, Dario
    Bosnjak, Andrija
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 2013, 83 (01) : 133 - 139
  • [26] Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: A single-center randomized controlled trial
    Songra, Goldie
    Clover, Matthew
    Atack, Nikki E.
    Ewings, Paul
    Sherriff, Martyn
    Sandy, Jonathan R.
    Ireland, Anthony J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2014, 145 (05) : 569 - 578
  • [27] Perceived pain for orthodontic patients with conventional brackets or self-ligating brackets over 1 month period: A single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial
    Lai, Tai-Ting
    Chiou, Jeng-Yuan
    Lai, Tai-Cheng
    Chen, Ted
    Wang, Huey-Yuan
    Li, Chung-Hsing
    Chen, Min-Huey
    JOURNAL OF THE FORMOSAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2020, 119 (01) : 282 - 289
  • [28] Comparison of orthodontic space closure using micro-osteoperforation and passive self-ligating appliances or conventional fixed appliances: A randomized controlled trial
    Mittal, Rashmi
    Attri, Sonal
    Batra, Puneet
    Sonar, Saurabh
    Sharma, Karan
    Raghavan, Sreevatsan
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 2020, 90 (05) : 634 - 639
  • [29] Randomized controlled clinical trial of oral health-related quality of life in patients wearing conventional and self-ligating brackets
    Othman, Siti Adibah
    Mansor, Noorhanizar
    Saub, Roslan
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2014, 44 (04) : 168 - 176
  • [30] Comparative assessment of dental and basal arch dimensions of passive and active self-ligating versus conventional appliances A randomized clinical trial
    Alabdullah, Mohannad M.
    Burhan, Ahmad S.
    Nabawia, Alaa
    Nawaya, Fehmieh
    Saltaji, Humam
    JOURNAL OF OROFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS-FORTSCHRITTE DER KIEFERORTHOPADIE, 2023, 84 (SUPPL 2): : 74 - 83