1.self Ligating Brackets Past Present Future of Orthodontics
1.self Ligating Brackets Past Present Future of Orthodontics
1.self Ligating Brackets Past Present Future of Orthodontics
Volume 2 Issue 1
Illustration 2 Self ligating ceramic brackets Table-1 History of Self Ligating System System Russell Lock Edgelok2 (Ormco) Mobil Lock (Forestadent) Speed3 (Strite Industries) Activa4 (A Company) Time (Adenta) Damon SL5 (A Company) Twinlock (Ormco) Damon 2 (A Company/Ormco) In Ovation (GAC) In Ovation R (GAC) Philippe (Forestadent) Smartclip (3M Unitek) Sure (Denrum) Quick (Forestadent) Damon 3MX (Ormco) Smartclip 2 (3M Unitek) In Ovation C (GAC) Clarity SL (3M Unitek) Smartclip 310 (3M Unitek)
Illustration 1 Conventional ceramic bracket with elastomeric ligature ties. * Trademark of GAC International ** Trademark of Strite Industries Ltd. *** Trademark of 3M Unitek **** Trademark of Ormco/A Company Professor Dept. of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopaedics Faculty of Dental Science, Dharmsinh Desai University, NADIAD - 387 001. GUJARAT
Year Introduced 1935 1972 1980 1980 1986 1994 1996 1998 2000 2000 2002 2002 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2007 2009
Address for Correspondence : Dr. Aakash Shah Dept. of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopaedics Faculty of Dental Science, Dharmsinh Desai University, NADIAD - 387 001. GUJARAT PHONE:079-27681666 E-MAIL: drabs@live.com 4
Volume 2 Issue 1
However, 50% patients have reported slide mechanism breakages in cases where Damon SL brackets were used. But introduction of newer systems like clip mechanism has virtually eliminated such problems. (ii) Reduced Friction :Very low friction with self ligating brackets has been clearly demonstrated and quantified in work by various authors. Bednar & Colleagues9 showed that elastomerics introduced more friction into the appliance system than stainless steel ligatures. Shivapuja & Berger7 confirmed this finding, reporting that wire ligating produced only 30-50% of the frictional forces as compared to elastomerics. Meling & Colleagues came to similar conclusions. The passive selfligating appliances (Damon, Smartclip) typically have lower friction than the active systems. (In Ovation R, Speed). A reduced friction appliance produces more rapid, efficient alignment, rotational corrections and space closure and thus it is also very less taxing on the anchorage. (iii)Efficiency & Ease of use :Self- ligation system results in a consistent reduction in chairtime for fixed appliance adjustment compared to conventional appliances. In SHIVAPUJA & BERGER study, the use of wire ligatures added almost 12 minutes to the time needed to remove & replace two arch wires. The time saved in selfligating system (chairside) could be used to schedule more patients, increase efficiency, improve patient relations, or allow oral hygiene reinforcement.
LOWEST FRICTION
Table-3 Reduced chairtime required for archwire removal & insertionwith self-ligating appliances as compared to conventional appliances. STUDY Maijer& Smith8 Shivapuja & Berger Voudouris Berger & Byloff Turnbull & Birnie SELF LIGATING SYSTEM SPEED Activa, Edgelok SPEED Interactwin SPEED Damon 2 CONVENTIONAL MODE OF LIGATION Elastomerics Wire ligatures Elastomerics Elastomerics Elastomerics TIME SAVINGS 7 minutes 12 minutes 2.5 minutes 2-3 minutes 1.5 minutes 5
Volume 2 Issue 1
Limitations of Conventional Ligation u failure to provide and to maintain full archwire engagement results in poor control of tooth movement. frictional values are increased for elastomerics, the force decays and therefore tooth control is not optimal. Both wire and elastomeric ligatures sometime become displaced. Oral hygiene is potentially impeded. Wire ligation is a time-consuming clinical procedure. Self ligation offers significant improvements relative to all of these factors. u Feature of self-ligatiing brackets available in Market. (A) Speed brackets : Speed brackets (Strite Industries Ltd., 298 Shepherd Avenue, Cambridge, Ohtario, N3C IVI Canada, Illustration 3) have remained in successful production since 1980. Earlier brackets had clips which could too easily be displaced or distorted . These drawbacks have been taken care of. These brackets doesnt have the familiar tie-wings
Illustration 3 Speed bracket (B) Activa brackets : Activa brackets (A Company, San Diego, CA, Illustration - 4) had a rotating slide, which therefore gave a concave inner radiaus to the labial surface of the slot. These increased slot depth reduced the labiolingual alignment efficiency. The bracket is wider than the average bracket, which reduced the inter-bracket span with the consequent disadvantages. Tiewings were absent and a different bonding base made bracket positioning more difficult.
Volume 2 Issue 1
(F) DAMON 3 and DAMON 3MX Brackets : Damon 3 and Damon 3MX brackets (Ormco corp. Illustration - 8) have a different location and action of the retaining spring, and this has produced a very easy and secure mechanism for opening and closing. In addition, Damon 3 brackets are semi-esthetic. However, early production of Damon 3 brackets suffered three significant problems : a high rate of bond failure, separation of metal from reinforced resin components, and fractured tie wings. These three problems received rapid and effective investigation and correction. Damon 3MX bracket is a all metal bracket with least problems
Illustration 5 Time 2 bracket (D) DAMON SL Brackets : Damon SL brackets (A Company, San Diego, CA, Illustration - 6) had a slide that wrapped around the labial face of the bracket. Launch of Damon brackets in mid 1990s made a definite step forward in popularity of self-ligating bracket. Damon SL brackets had two significant problems the slides sometimes opened inadvertently and they were prone to breakage.
Illustration 6 Damon SL bracket (E) DAMON 2 Brackets : Damon 2 brackets (Ormco Corp. Illustration - 7) were introduced to address the imperfections of Damon SL. Combined with the introduction of metal injection molding manufacture & slight design changes, Damon 2 brackets are almost completely free from inadvertent slide opening or slide breakage. However, the brackets were not immediately and consistently very easy to open.
Illustration 8 Damon 3 and Damon 3MX brackets (G) SYSTEM R Brackets : System R brackets (GAC International Inc. 355 kniterboker Ave. Bohemina, NY11716, Illustration - 9) originally called In-ovation brackets, are very similar to the speed brackets in conception and design, but of a twin configuration with tie wings. In 2002, smaller brackets for the lower anterior teeth became available. In-Ovation R (Reduce, referring to the reduced brackets width) and this narrower width was effective in terms of greater inter bracket span. The bracket subsequently became known as system R. Some brackets of this type are difficult to open and this is more common in the lower arch where the gingival end of the spring clip is difficult to visualize. Excess composite at the gingival aspect of brackets in the lower arch can be difficult to see and may also hinder opening. Similarly, lace backs, under ties and elastemerics placed behind the arch-wire are competing for space with the bracket clip. Both Speed and System R and also the similar and recently released Quick brackets (forestadent Bernhard Foerster Gmbh, fig. 8) have addressed this difficulty by providing a labial hole or notch in the clip in which a probe or similar instrument can be inserted to open the brackets
Volume 2 Issue 1
Illustration 10 Smartclip Bracket COST AND TREATMENT EFFICIECY Currently available self-ligating brackets are more expensive then most good quality tie wing brackets. A modest balancing factor is the cost of elastic ligatures that are, ofcourse not required. However, this significant extra cost must be measured against savings in time an expensive commodity. Self- ligating brackets save appreciable chairside time as many studies suggests, which becomes an added saving. Many studies have shown a mean reduction of 4 months in active treatment when treated with self-ligating brackets. The more recent bracket type would be expected to show still better treatment efficiency because they are less prone to breakage or loss of the clips and slides, are easier to open and close, are frequently of more effective slot dimensions, and are used with greater understanding of the optimal archwire selection and appointment intervals.
CONCLUSIONS : Currently available self-ligating brackets offer the very valuable combination of extremely low friction and secure full bracket engagement and at last they are sufficiently robust and user-friendly to deliver most of the potential advantages of this type of bracket. The core advantages of self-ligation are now established and readily available. These developments offer the possibility of a significant reduction in average treatment time and may be also in anchorage requirements, particularly in cases requiring large tooth movements. A significant clinical advantage of self ligating brackets is subsequently reduced plaque accumulating sites and also very easy to brush (as lack of ligature wire around each bracket) the whole appliance. While further refinements are desirable and further studies essential, current brackets appear able to deliver measurable benefits with good robustness and ease of use. References: 1. Stolzenberg J: The Russell attachment and its improved advantages. Int J Orthod Dent Child 21:837-840, 1935 2. Wildman A J :Round table the Edgelok bracket. J Clin Orthod 6:613-623, 1972 3. Berger J L : The SPEED appliance : a 14 year update on this unique self-ligating orthodontic mechanism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 105:217-223, 1994 4. Harradine NWT, Bernie DJ: The clinical use of Activa self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 109:319-328, 1996 5. Damon DH: The rationale , evolution & clinical application of the self-ligating bracket. Clin Orthod Res 1:52-61, 1998 6. Taloumis LJ, Smith TM, Hondrum SO, et al: Force decay & deformation of orthodontic elastomeric ligatures. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 111:1-11, 19997 7. Shivapuja PK, Berger J : A comparative study of conventional ligation & self-ligation bracket systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 106:472-480, 1994 8. Maijer R, Smith DC: Time saving with self-ligating brackets. J Clin Orthod 24:29-31, 1990 9. Bednar, J. R.; Gruendeman, G. W.; & Sandrik, J.L.: A comparative study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets & arch wires, Am. J. Orthod. 100:513-522, 1991 10. Smartclip self-ligating appliance system : concept & biomechanics By Hugo Trevisi (Textbook of MOSBY Elsevier Ltd.)