Korean J Orthod.  2018 Jul;48(4):236-244. 10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.236.

The effect of occlusogingival placement of clinical bracket points on the adaptation of a straight wire to the lingual arch form

• Abdi AH
• Motamedian SR
• Balaghi E
• Nouri M

• KMID: 2417965
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.236

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to compare the adaptation of a straight wire between brackets positioned at the mid-lingual surface and those placed gingivally by using a three-dimensional simulation software.
METHODS
This cross-sectional study was performed using OrthoAid, an in-house software. The subjects were 36 adolescents with normal Class I occlusion. For each dental cast, two bracket positioning approaches, namely the middle and gingival, were examined. In the middle group, the reference points were placed on the mid-lingual surface of each tooth, while in the gingival group, the reference points were positioned lingually on the anterior teeth. A 4th degree polynomial was adopted, and the in-plane and off-plane root mean squares (RMSs) of the distances between the reference points and the fitted polynomial curve were calculated using the software. Statistical analysis was performed using the paired-samples t-test (α = 0.05).
RESULTS
The mean in-plane RMS of the polynomial curve to the bracket distance in the gingival group was significantly lower than that in the middle group (p < 0.001). The off-plane RMS was higher in the gingivally positioned brackets in the maxilla than in the middle group (p < 0.001). However, the off-plane RMS in mandible was not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.274).
CONCLUSIONS
The results demonstrated that the gingival placement of lingual brackets on the anterior teeth could decrease the distance between a tooth and the straight wire.

Keyword

Orthodontics; Orthodontic brackets; Tooth movement techniques; Lingual orthodontics

MeSH Terms

Adolescent
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Mandible
Maxilla
Orthodontic Brackets
Orthodontics
Tooth

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 A sample lingual arch form evaluation using the OrthoAid software. A, For the maxillary arch; B, for the mandibular arch. Following the definition of the reference points on the lingual surface, the software calculates the polynomial curve, measures the distances of each tooth to the curve (in the left), and calculates the root mean square error of all distances.

• 

  Figure 2 Determination of the in-plane and off-plane root mean square (RMS) errors. A, The hypothetical plane in which the polynomial curve is drawn (green arrow) can be visualized using the software. Magnified view of parts 1–3 is shown in subfigures b–d, respectively. B, In-plane error is the distance between the reference points and the polynomial curve in the hypothetical plane at which the curve is drawn (black dots, reference points; blue curve, the polynomial curve; red line, in-plane error). C, Off-plane error is the distance between the reference points and the hypothetical plane (red arrows: off-plane error). D, The in-plane and off-plane RMS errors of all 14 reference points are calculated and reported by the software.

Reference

1. Fujita K. New orthodontic treatment with lingual bracket mushroom arch wire appliance. Am J Orthod. 1979; 76:657–675.

2. Kurz C, Swartz ML, Andreiko C. Lingual orthodontics: a status report. Part 2: Research and development. J Clin Orthod. 1982; 16:735–740.

3. Takemoto K, Scuzzo G, Lombardo LU, Takemoto YU. Lingual straight wire method. Int Orthod. 2009; 7:335–353.

4. Shpack N, Geron S, Floris I, Davidovitch M, Brosh T, Vardimon AD. Bracket placement in lingual vs labial systems and direct vs indirect bonding. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77:509–517.

5. Balut N, Klapper L, Sandrik J, Bowman D. Variations in bracket placement in the preadjusted orthodontic appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 102:62–67.

6. Geron S. The lingual bracket jig. J Clin Orthod. 1999; 33:457–463.

7. Stamm T, Wiechmann D, Heinecken A, Ehmer U. Relation between second and third order problems in lingual orthodontic treatment. J Ling Orthod. 2000; 1:5.

8. Geron S, Romano R, Brosh T. Vertical forces in labial and lingual orthodontics applied on maxillary incisors--a theoretical approach. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74:195–201.

9. Liang W, Rong Q, Lin J, Xu B. Torque control of the maxillary incisors in lingual and labial orthodontics: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135:316–322.

10. Park KH, Bayome M, Park JH, Lee JW, Baek SH, Kook YA. New classification of lingual arch form in normal occlusion using three dimensional virtual models. Korean J Orthod. 2015; 45:74–81.

11. Wiechmann D, Rummel V, Thalheim A, Simon JS, Wiechmann L. Customized brackets and archwires for lingual orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124:593–599.

12. Takemoto K, Scuzzo G. The straight-wire concept in lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod. 2001; 35:46–52.

13. Nouri M, Asefi S, Akbarzadeh Baghban A, Ahmadvand M, Shamsa M. Objective vs subjective analyses of arch form and preformed archwire selection. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 149:543–554.

14. Padisar P, Nouri M, Zajkani E. Changes in mandibular anterior teeth alignment of 12–14 years olds during a 4-years follow up in Qazvin. Iranian J Orthod. 2008; 3:109–115.

15. Nouri M, Farzan A, Safavi MR, Akbarzadeh Bagheban A. Evaluation of number of reference clinical points effect on dental arch curve construction with three-dimensional method. J Indian Dent Assoc. 2012; 24:104–110.

16. Nouri M, Massudi R, Bagheban AA, Azimi S, Fereidooni F. The accuracy of a 3-D laser scanner for crown width measurements. Aust Orthod J. 2009; 25:41–47.

17. Thurow RC. Edgewise orthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby;1982. p. 327.

18. Archambault A, Major TW, Carey JP, Heo G, Badawi H, Major PW. A comparison of torque expression between stainless steel, titanium molybdenum alloy, and copper nickel titanium wires in metallic self-ligating brackets. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80:884–889.

19. Morina E, Eliades T, Pandis N, Jäger A, Bourauel C. Torque expression of self-ligating brackets compared with conventional metallic, ceramic, and plastic brackets. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30:233–238.

20. Sifakakis I, Pandis N, Makou M, Eliades T, Katsaros C, Bourauel C. A comparative assessment of torque generated by lingual and conventional brackets. Eur J Orthod. 2013; 35:375–380.

21. Manni A, Cirulli N, Grassi R. Personalized orthodontic bracket height in relation to marginal ridges. World J Orthod. 2007; 8:e10–e14.

22. Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Takemoto Y, Takemoto A, Lombardo L. A new lingual straight-wire technique. J Clin Orthod. 2010; 44:114–123. quiz 106.

23. Fillion D. Clinical advantages of the Orapix-straight wire lingual technique. Int Orthod. 2010; 8:125–151.

24. Fillion D. Lingual straightwire treatment with the Orapix system. J Clin Orthod. 2011; 45:488–497. quiz 515.

25. Lombardo L, Saba L, Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Oteo L, Palma JC, et al. A new concept of anatomic lingual arch form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138:260.e1–260.e13. discussion 260–1.

26. Oda S, Arai K, Nakahara R. Commercially available archwire forms compared with normal dental arch forms in a Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137:520–527.

27. Kairalla SA, Scuzzo G, Triviño T, Velasco L, Lombardo L, Paranhos LR. Determining shapes and dimensions of dental arches for the use of straight-wire arches in lingual technique. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014; 19:116–122.

28. Felton JM, Sinclair PM, Jones DL, Alexander RG. A computerized analysis of the shape and stability of mandibular arch form. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 92:478–483.

29. AlHarbi S, Alkofide EA, AlMadi A. Mathematical analyses of dental arch curvature in normal occlusion. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78:281–287.

30. Noroozi H, Nik TH, Saeeda R. The dental arch form revisited. Angle Orthod. 2001; 71:386–389.