Morphological Considerations in Lingual Appliance Design: A Descriptive Study

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Certificate in Orthodontics, Dept. of Orthodontics, University of Connecticut Health Center, 198

Tooth Borne Anchorage: A Comparative Analysis

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare two anchorage modalities. Differential mass and differential moments were compared for their anchorage effectiveness in the sagittal and vertical dimensions. Class I patients with maximum anchorage requirements and treated with four first premolar extractions were selected. Background: Due to a severe combination of crowding, incisor proclination and protrusion, and procumbency of the lips, certain patients require extractions and maximum anchorage in orthodontic treatment.8 Two tooth borne anchorage modalities, differential mass and differential moments, have been shown to be able to achieve maximum anchorage requirements.5, 7 Methods: The available digital records of all patients (n=6478) treated within the Nova Southeastern University Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (NSU-DODO) clinic were searched to find all patients meeting the inclusion criteria. All patients that met the inclusion 6 criteria were selected and divided into the two groups, differential mass and differential moments, based on the tooth borne anchorage modality utilized during their treatment. Of the available records, 24 patients met the criteria for the differential mass group, while 10 patients met the criteria for the differential moments group. The pre-treatment and post-treatment cephalometric radiographs were traced and superimposed to evaluate the amount change of the upper and lower first molars in the sagittal and vertical dimensions during treatment. Results: The differential mass group, on average, showed less anchorage loss compared to the differential moments group, in the sagittal and vertical dimensions for the upper and lower first molars. The differential moments group, compared to the differential mass group, had smaller standard deviations and ranges in all dimensions in the lower molars and in the sagittal dimension for the upper molars. These differences were not found to be statistically significant. The statistical variance of the effect size showed that 65% of the variance in the lower arch and 64% of the variance in the upper arch were due to unknown circumstances. Conclusion: The null hypotheses, that both anchorage modalities would provide the same magnitude of anchorage, could not be rejected. This study was limited by many factors, including treatment by different residents, supervision by different clinical faculty members, unspecified initial treatment goals, and potential errors in measurement. This study is clinically relevant within the NSU-DODO clinic to show the results of completed treatments within the NSU-DODO clinic, and should be considered by the residents and faculty in the future treatment of patients with similar malocclusions

A glimpse into the future with orthodontics’ smart brackets

O aparelho ortodôntico fixo tipo multibandas atual não permite medir ‘in-vivo’ as forças e torques aplicados ao dente individual. Para um tratamento ideal e para reduzir os efeitos iatrogênicos, o ‘Smart Bracket’ foi desenvolvido para uma próxima geração de aparelhos ortodônticos fixos fornecendo ao ortodontista uma medida quantitativa sobre as forças e torques aplicados a cada dente ao longo da terapia. O presente trabalho pretende ser uma revisão narrativa da literatura tendo como objetivo descrever o conceito de ‘Smart Bracket’, comparando-o com os aparelhos ortodônticos fixos atuais. Além disso, procura analisar e resumir o seu desenvolvimento e a evolução dos seus vários protótipos existentes. A pesquisa foi realizada entre Fevereiro e Agosto de 2020 por meio do motor de busca B-On (entre outros), para o período temporal 2005-2020, com o objectivo de sintetizar a literatura sobre o sistema, identificar seus limites e, eventualmente, recomendar novos temas de pesquisa. Adicionalmente, artigos de revisão e livros científicos foram consultados a partir de 2000 para apresentar os atuais aparelhos multibandas e seus efeitos iatrogênicos.The current multi-bracket appliances do not allow to measure ‘in-vivo’ the forces and torques applied to the individual tooth. For an ideal treatment and to reduce iatrogenic effects, the ‘Smart Bracket’ has been developed for a next generation of fixed orthodontic appliances providing the orthodontist with quantitative measure of the forces and torques applied to each tooth throughout therapy. The present work intends to be a narrative review of the literature aiming to describe the concept of ‘Smart Bracket’, comparing it with the current fixed orthodontic appliances. In addition, it seeks to analyze and summarize its development and the evolution of its various existing prototypes. The literature research was carried out between February and August 2020 using the search engine B-On (among others), for the period 2005-2020, with the aim of synthesizing the literature on the system, identifying its limits and, eventually, recommend new research topics. In addition, review articles and scientific books were consulted from 2000 onwards to present the current multiband devices and their iatrogenic effects

Different methods of canine retraction-Part 2

Background: This review aims to discuss various canine retraction techniques using frictionless mechanics. Methods: Between 1930 and February 2022, searches were conducted about various canine retraction techniques using fixed orthodontic appliances in various databases, including PubMed Central, Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, the Cochrane Library, Textbooks, Google Scholar, Research Gate, and manual searching. Results: After removing the duplicate articles, publications that described how to use archwires to perform canine retraction with the archwires were included. Conclusions: The pros and cons of various canine retraction techniques using archwires were thoroughly discussed. T-loop is the preferred spring of all because of its characteristics.</p

Different methods of canine retraction-Part 2

Background: This review aims to discuss various canine retraction techniques using frictionless mechanics. Methods: Between 1930 and February 2022, searches were conducted about various canine retraction techniques using fixed orthodontic appliances in various databases, including PubMed Central, Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, the Cochrane Library, Textbooks, Google Scholar, Research Gate, and manual searching. Results: After removing the duplicate articles, publications that described how to use archwires to perform canine retraction with the archwires were included. Conclusions: The pros and cons of various canine retraction techniques using archwires were thoroughly discussed. T-loop is the preferred spring of all because of its characteristics.</p