scholarly journals Influence of ligation method on friction resistance of lingual brackets with different second-order angulations: an in vitro study

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 34-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graziane Olímpio Pereira ◽  
Carla Maria Melleiro Gimenez ◽  
Lucas Prieto ◽  
Marcos Gabriel do Lago Prieto ◽  
Roberta Tarkany Basting
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Static Friction ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Friction Resistance ◽  
Lingual Brackets ◽  
Sliding Mechanics

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate stainless steel archwire static friction in active and passive self-ligating lingual and conventional brackets with second-order angulations. Methods: Two conventional lingual brackets for canines (STb light/Ormco; PSWb/Tecnident), and two self-ligating brackets, one active (In-Ovation L/GAC) and the other passive (3D/ Forestadent), were evaluated. A stainless steel archwire was used at 0°, 3° and 5° angulations. Metal ligatures, conventional elastic ligatures, and low friction elastic ligatures were also tested. A universal testing machine applied friction between brackets and wires, simulating sliding mechanics, to produce 2-mm sliding at 3 mm/minute speed. Results: Two-way analysis of variance demonstrated a significant effect of the interaction between brackets and angulations (p < 0.001). Tukey test indicated that the highest frictional resistance values were observed at 5° angulation for In-Ovation L, PSWb bracket with non conventional ligature, and STb bracket with metal ligature. As for 3D, PSWb with conventional or metal ligatures, and STb brackets with non conventional ligature, showed significantly lower static frictional resistance with 0° angulation. At 0° angulation, STb brackets with metal ties, In-Ovation L brackets and 3D brackets had the lowest frictional resistance. Conclusions: As the angulation increased from 0° to 3°, static friction resistance increased. When angulation increased from 3° to 5°, static friction resistance increased or remained the same. Self-ligating 3D and In-Ovation L brackets, as well as conventional STb brackets, seem to be the best option when sliding mechanics is used to perform lingual orthodontic treatment.

scholarly journals An In Vitro Evaluation of Frictional Characteristics of Labial and Lingual Self-ligating Brackets with Various Archwire Alloys

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-213
Author(s):  
Subrat Kumar Sahany ◽  
G. Sreejith Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Frictional Force ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Fixed Appliance ◽  
Conventional Brackets ◽  
Frictional Forces ◽  
Dry And Wet Conditions ◽  
Lingual Brackets

Background: An understanding of bracket slot–archwire interface is imperative for biomechanical effectiveness in orthodontic sliding mechanics and hence the aim of the study is to evaluate frictional properties of lingual self-ligating brackets comparing with conventional lingual and labial self-ligating brackets using three different archwire alloys in various environments. Materials and Methods: This in vitro study compared the frictional force of labial and lingual self-ligating and conventional lingual brackets with stainless steel, TMA, and Cr-Co alloy archwires of 0.017” × 0.025” dimension in dry and wet conditions. Frictional forces were evaluated in a simulated half arch fixed appliance using a testing machine. Static and kinetic friction were measured and analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANNOVA) test and post hoc Duncan multiple range test. The effects of brackets and archwires in dry and wet conditions were analyzed by three-way variance (ANNOVA) test. Result: The maximum frictional forces were observed with labial self-ligating brackets followed by lingual conventional brackets and the least by lingual self-ligating brackets. Of all the wires tested, TMA wires had the maximum frictional forces followed by Co-Cr and stainless steel. In both conditions, the values were non-significant with all bracket–wire combinations except with Co-Cr and TMA wires. Conclusions: Varied amount of frictional force was shown by the brackets and wires with highest by labial self-ligating bracket, followed by lingual conventional and lingual self-ligating brackets. TMA wires experienced higher friction followed by Co-Cr and stainless steel with minimum friction.

scholarly journals A Comparative Evaluation of Static Frictional Resistance Using Various Methods of Ligation at Different Time Intervals: An In Vitro Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanpreet Singh Natt ◽  
Amandeep Kaur Sekhon ◽  
Sudhir Munjal ◽  
Rohit Duggal ◽  
Anup Holla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Static Friction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Dry Conditions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Time Periods

Aim. To compare and evaluate the static frictional resistance offered by the four different types of ligation methods in both dry and wet conditions and at different durations when immersed in artificial saliva.Material and Methods. Alastik Easy to Tie modules, Super Slick Mini Stix elastomeric modules, Power “O” modules, and 0.009″Stainless Steel ligatures were used to compare the static friction using maxillary canine and premolar Preadjusted Edgewise brackets with 0.022″× 0.028″slot and 0.019″× 0.025″stainless steel wires.Results. The mean frictional resistance for Alastik modules was the lowest and that of Stainless Steel ligatures was found to be highest among the four groups compared and the difference among the four groups was statistically significant (P<0.005). The mean static frictional resistance in all groups under dry conditions was lower than that under wet conditions. No statistical significant differences were found when the groups were compared at different time periods of immersion in artificial saliva.Conclusion. This study concludes that the Alastik modules showed the lowest mean static frictional forces compared to any other ligation method, though no significant difference was found for different time periods of immersion in the artificial saliva.

scholarly journals Frictional Resistance between Orthodontic Brackets and Archwire: An in vitro Study

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Avinash Kumar ◽  
Nadeem Husain
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Frictional Force ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
Steel Wire ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Wet Condition

ABSTRACT Aim The purpose of this investigation was to determine the kinetic frictional resistance offered by stainless steel and Titanium bracket used in combination with rectangular stainless steel wire during in vitro translatory displacement of brackets. Materials and methods In this study. Brackets: (All brackets used had a torque of – 7° and an angulation of 0°): (1) Dynalock (Unitek) 0.018” slot, 3.3 mm bracket width, (2) Mini Uni-Twin (Unitek) 0.018” slot, 1.6 mm bracket width, (3) Ultra-Minitrim (Dentaurum) 0.022” slot 3.3 mm bracket width, (4) Titanium (Dentaurum) 0.022” slot, 3.3 mm bracket width. WIRES: (1) 0.016 × 0.022” stainless steel (Dentaurum), (2) 0.017 × 0.025’'stainless steel (Unitek), (3) 0.018 × 0.025” stainless steel (Dentaurum), elastomeric modules (Ortho Organisers), 0. 009” stainless steel ligature wires, hooks made of 0.021 × 0.025” stainless steel wires, super glue to bond the hooks to the base of the bracket, acetone to condition the bracket and wires before testing and artificial saliva. Brackets were moved along the wire by means of an Instron universal testing machine (1101) and forces were measured by a load cell. All values were recorded in Newtons and then converted into gms (1N-102 gm). 200 gm was then subtracted from these values to find out the frictional force for each archwire/bracket combination. For each archwire/ bracket combination three readings were taken under wet and dry condition and also with stainless steel ligature and elastomeric modules separately. Results The results showed that narrow brackets generated more friction than wider brackets. Frictional force was directly proportional to wire dimension. Titanium brackets generated more friction than stainless steel brackets. Archwire and bracket ligated with elastomeric module generated more friction than when ligated with stainless steel ligature wire. Frictional forces in the wet condition were greater than in the dry condition for all archwire to bracket combinations. Conclusion Frictional force was seen to be inversely proportional to bracket width, frictional force was inversely proportional to bracket width, and in the wet condition were greater than in the dry condition for all archwire to bracket combinations. Clinical significance This study of friction is its role in lessening the force actually received by a tooth from an active component such as a spring, loop or elastic. Hence greater applied force is needed to move a tooth with a bracket archwire combination demonstrating high magnitudes of friction compared with one with a low frictional value. How to cite this article Husain N, Kumar A. Frictional Resistance between Orthodontic Brackets and Archwire: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(2):91-99.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Frictional forces between different Archwire-bracket Combinations

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinit Singh ◽  
Swati Acharya ◽  
Satyabrata Patnaik ◽  
Smruti Bhusan Nanda
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Nickel Titanium ◽  
Orthodontic Bracket ◽  
Fixed Appliance ◽  
Beta Titanium ◽  
Frictional Forces

Introduction: During sliding mechanics, frictional resistance is an important counterforce to orthodontic tooth movement; whichmust be controlled to allow application of light continuous forces.Objective: To investigate static and kinetic frictional resistance between three orthodontic brackets: ceramic, self-ligating, andstainless steel, and three 0.019×0.025” archwires: stainless steel, nickel-titanium, titanium-molybdenum.Materials & Method: The in vitro study compared the effects of stainless steel, nickel-titanium, and beta-titanium archwires onfrictional forces of three orthodontic bracket systems: ceramic, self-ligating, and stainless steel brackets. All brackets had 0.022”slots, and the wires were 0.019×0.025”. Friction was evaluated in a simulated half-arch fixed appliance on a testing machine. Thestatic and kinetic friction data were analyzed with 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc Duncan multiple rangetest.Result: Self-ligating (Damon) brackets generated significantly lower static and kinetic frictional forces than stainless steel (Gemini)and ceramic brackets (Clarity). Among the archwire materials, Beta-titanium showed the maximum amount of frictional forceand stainless steel archwires had the lowest frictional force.Conclusion: The static and kinetic frictional force for stainless steel bracket was lowest in every combination of wire.

scholarly journals RETENTION OF MINI SCREWS IN ORTHODONTICS – A COMPARATIVE IN VITRO STUDY ON THE VARIABLES

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-42
Author(s):  
Nikhil Asok
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Compressive Load ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Digital Radiographs ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Load To Failure

Objectives: To correlate between the different lengths, angles of insertion and the mini-implant material and find out the most retentive combination. Materials and methods: 48 mini-implants (24 Titanium and 24 stainless steel) of lengths 6mm, 8mm and 1.5 mm diameter were inserted into humerus bone of goat at two different angulations, 600 and 900. To insert the mini-implant in the respective angulations, custom made template was made and the angles were confirmed with digital radiographs. Force was applied on to the mini-implants with a universal testing machine and the compressive load to failure was measured. Results: Results revealed that stability of the implant was positively correlating with the length of implant. A perpendicular angulation produced more stability. Moreover, titanium mini-implants had more resistance to compressive load than stainless steel mini-implants. Conclusion: Length of mini-implant, its angulation in the bone and the material of mini-implant were factors affecting its stability. In this study, titanium mini-implant of 8mm length angulated at 900 were stable than their counterparts.

scholarly journals Reconstruction of Pulpotomized Primary Molar and Retention of Stainless-steel Crowns: An In-vitro Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 511-514
Author(s):  
Mehrshad Zareiyan ◽  
Fatemeh Molaasadolah ◽  
Roza Haghgoo ◽  
Rahil Ahmadi ◽  
Mehrdad Kahvand
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Pediatric Dentistry ◽  
Tissue Loss ◽  
Dental Tissue ◽  
Primary Molar ◽  
Tissue Reconstruction

Background: Stainless steel crowns are proposed to restore severely decayed teeth in pediatric dentistry. Yet, their retention is still debatable. Objective: This study aimed to investigate whether dental tissue reconstruction before placement of stainless steel crown on pulpotomized first primary molar affects the retention of stainless steel crowns. Methods: This experimental in-vitro study was performed on 30 extracted first primary molars with carious occlusal and distal surfaces. Dental caries and the pulp chamber roof were respectively removed. The stainless steel crowns were placed after tooth preparation. The samples were randomly divided into two groups (n=15) i.e, ZoE core buildup, and ZoE liner. Stainless steel crowns were cemented with self-curing glass ionomer cement. The crown retention was tested with the Instron testing machine. The two groups were compared by using SPSS software through the t-test (α=0.05). Results: The mean crown retention in the liner group (291.45±43.196 N) was significantly higher than that of the core buildup group (202.00±63.515 N) (P=0.001). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study for restoring the teeth with extensive tissue loss by SSC, ZoE should be used as lining without a core on teeth.

scholarly journals Evaluation and Comparison of Two Different Mouthwashes on Frictional Resistance Between Orthodontic Bracket and Archwire: An in Vitro Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-125
Author(s):  
Jayanti Choudhary ◽  
B Shashikumar ◽  
Anand K Patil
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
Steel Wire ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Tea Tree ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Significant Difference

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effect of tea tree oil (TTO) mouthwash and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash on frictional resistance. Settings and Design: In vitro. Materials and Methods: In total, 60 extracted premolars were mounted on a custom-made acrylic fixture. These 60 premolars were randomly divided into 3 groups of 20 each, on which 0.022″ × 0.028″ slot MBT stainless steel brackets were bonded and 0.019″ × 0.025″ rectangular stainless steel wire was ligated with an elastomeric module. The 3 groups included a control group where the samples were immersed in artificial saliva and 2 experimental groups immersed in 0.2% CHX and TTO mouthwash, respectively, for 1.5 hours. Postimmersion static frictional resistance was evaluated on a universal testing machine at crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Statistical Analysis Used: Tukey’s post hoc procedure. Results: This study showed a statistically significant difference in the frictional resistance between saliva and CHX groups and CHX and TTO groups ( P < .05). No statistically significant difference was observed between saliva and TTO groups ( P > .05). The frictional resistance was more in the CHX mouthwash group than in the TTO mouthwash group. Conclusions: Frictional resistance was lesser in the TTO mouthwash than in the CHX mouthwash. Based on this result, TTO mouthwash can be used instead of CHX mouthwash as an oral hygiene aid in patients with orthodontic treatments.

scholarly journals Comparison of frictional resistance between four types of brackets in combination with stainless steel and beta-titanium archwires

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 231-237
Author(s):  
Shweta Nagesh ◽  
Nagarajshetty Praveen ◽  
Reddy Sumitra
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Static Friction ◽  
Human Saliva ◽  
Beta Titanium ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Sliding Mechanics ◽  
One Way Anova

Objectives: The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the frictional resistance generated by four different types of brackets in combination with stainless steel (SS) and titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA) archwires. Materials and Methods: Maxillary premolar brackets were used in this study. These brackets were divided into eight groups comprising seven samples each. Of the eight groups, four groups were combined with SS and four groups were combined with TMA archwires. The testing was done in the presence of human saliva. The static frictional resistance was calculated for each group. One-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests were done to compare the friction generated by each group. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the friction generated by the monocrystalline brackets and the other bracket groups (P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in static friction generated between self-ligating and conventionally ligated brackets. There was a statistically significant difference between the frictional resistance produced by SS and TMA wires (P = 0.02) with regard to monocrystalline ceramic brackets only. Conclusion: Monocrystalline ceramic brackets (Radiance) were found to generate the highest frictional resistance during sliding mechanics when compared to other brackets in combination with both SS and TMA wires. Self-ligating brackets did not show a statistically significant reduction in friction when compared to conventional ligation. There was a statistically significant difference between SS and TMA wires when used with monocrystalline brackets.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document