Tooth mobility restriction by multistranded and CAD/CAM retainers-an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: Orthodontic retainers should restrict physiological tooth mobility as little as possible. While this has been investigated for multistranded retainers, there is a lack of data for novel CAD/CAM retainers. To address this, the present study compared the restriction of physiological tooth mobility in multistranded retainers and different CAD/CAM retainers. MATERIAL/METHODS: One group of multistranded (n = 8) and five groups of CAD/CAM retainers (nickel-titanium (NiTi), titanium grade 5 (Ti5), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), zirconia (ZrO2), and cobalt-chromium (CoCr); each n = 8) bonded from canine to canine were investigated for their influence on vertical and horizontal tooth mobility using an in vitro model of a lower arch in a universal testing machine. Load-deflection curves were determined and statistically analysed. RESULTS: All retainers restricted tooth mobility to varying extents. The retainers had less of an influence on vertical tooth mobility, with less of a difference between retainers (14%-38% restriction). In contrast, significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were observed between retainers in the restriction of horizontal tooth mobility. ZrO2 retainers had the greatest impact, restricting horizontal tooth mobility by 82% (68 ± 20 µm/100N), followed by CoCr (75%, 94 ± 26 µm/100N) and PEEK (73%, 103 ± 28 µm/100N) CAD/CAM retainers, which had comparable effects on horizontal tooth mobility. Ti5 (54%, 175 ± 66 µm/100N) and NiTi (34%, 248 ± 119 µm/100N) CAD/CAM retainers had less of an influence on horizontal tooth mobility, and were comparable to multistranded retainers (44%, 211 ± 77 µm/100N). LIMITATIONS: This is an in vitro study, so clinical studies are needed to draw clinical conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Multistranded and CAD/CAM retainers have different effects on tooth mobility in vitro. These effects should be further explored in future in vivo studies.

Comparison of six different CAD/CAM retainers vs. the stainless steel twistflex retainer: an in vitro investigation of survival rate and stability.

PURPOSE: To compare failure rates and maximum load capacity (Fmax) of six different computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) retainers with those of the hand-bent five-stranded stainless steel twistflex retainer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six groups (n = 8 per group) of commercially available CAD/CAM retainers (cobalt-chromium [CoCr], titanium grade 5 [Ti5], nickel-titanium [NiTi], zirconia [ZrO2], polyetheretherketone [PEEK], and gold) and twistflex retainers were tested for long-term sufficiency and for Fmax using a self-developed in vitro model. All retainer models underwent a simulated ageing process of about 15 years (1,200,000 chewing cycles with a force magnitude of 65 N at 45° followed by storage in water at 37 °C for 30 days). If retainers did not debond or break during ageing, their Fmax was determined in a universal testing machine. Data were statistically analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U­tests. RESULTS: Twistflex retainers did not fail (0/8) during ageing and had the highest Fmax (445 N ± 51 N). Ti5 retainers were the only CAD/CAM retainers that also did not fail (0/8) and had similar Fmax values (374 N ± 62 N). All other CAD/CAM retainers had higher failure rates during ageing and significantly lower Fmax values (p < 0.01; ZrO2: 1/8, 168 N ± 52 N; gold: 3/8, 130 N ± 52 N; NiTi: 5/8, 162 N ± 132 N; CoCr: 6/8, 122 N ± 100 N; PEEK: 8/8, 65 ± 0 N). Failure was due to breakage in the NiTi retainers and debonding in all other retainers. CONCLUSION: Twistflex retainers remain the gold standard regarding biomechanical properties and long-term sufficiency. Of the CAD/CAM retainers tested, Ti5 retainers seem to be the most suitable alternative. In contrast, all other CAD/CAM retainers investigated in this study showed high failure rates and had significantly lower Fmax values.

Influence of Individual Bracket Base Design on the Shear Bond Strength of In-Office 3D Printed Brackets-An In Vitro Study.

(1) Background: Novel high-performance polymers for medical 3D printing enable in-office manufacturing of fully customized brackets. Previous studies have investigated clinically relevant parameters such as manufacturing precision, torque transmission, and fracture stability. The aim of this study is to evaluate different design options of the bracket base concerning the adhesive bond between the bracket and tooth, measured as the shear bond strength (SBS) and maximum force (Fmax) according to DIN 13990. (2) Methods: Three different designs for printed bracket bases were compared with a conventional metal bracket (C). The following configurations were chosen for the base design: Matching of the base to the anatomy of the tooth surface, size of the cross-sectional area corresponding to the control group (C), and a micro- (A) and macro- (B) retentive design of the base surface. In addition, a group with a micro-retentive base (D) matched to the tooth surface and an increased size was studied. The groups were analyzed for SBS, Fmax, and adhesive remnant index (ARI). The Kruskal-Wallis test with a post hoc test (Dunn-Bonferroni) and Mann-Whitney U test were used for statistical analysis (significance level: p < 0.05). (3) Results: The values for SBS and Fmax were highest in C (SBS: 12.0 ± 3.8 MPa; Fmax: 115.7 ± 36.6 N). For the printed brackets, there were significant differences between A and B (A: SBS 8.8 ± 2.3 MPa, Fmax 84.7 ± 21.8 N; B: SBS 12.0 ± 2.1 MPa, Fmax 106.5 ± 20.7 N). Fmax was significantly different for A and D (D: Fmax 118.5 ± 22.8 N). The ARI score was highest for A and lowest for C. (4) Conclusions: This study shows that conventional brackets form a more stable bond with the tooth than the 3D-printed brackets. However, for successful clinical use, the shear bond strength of the printed brackets can be increased with a macro-retentive design and/or enlargement of the base.

Concept for the Treatment of Class III Anomalies with a Skeletally Anchored Appliance Fabricated in the CAD/CAM Process-The MIRA Appliance.

OBJECTIVE: Intermaxillary elastics, anchored skeletally, represent a promising concept for treatment in adolescent patients with skeletal Class III anomalies. A challenge in existing concepts is the survival rate of the miniscrews in the mandible or the invasiveness of the bone anchors. A novel concept, the mandibular interradicular anchor (MIRA) appliance, for improving skeletal anchorage in the mandible, will be presented and discussed. CLINICAL CASE: In a ten-year-old female patient with a moderate skeletal Class III, the novel MIRA concept, combined with maxillary protraction, was applied. This involved the use of a CAD/CAM-fabricated indirect skeletal anchorage appliance in the mandible, with interradicularly placed miniscrews distal to each canine (MIRA appliance), and a hybrid hyrax in the maxilla with paramedian placed miniscrews. The modified alt-RAMEC protocol involved an intermittent weekly activation for five weeks. Class III elastics were worn for a period of seven months. This was followed by alignment with a multi-bracket appliance. DISCUSSION: The cephalometric analysis before and after therapy shows an improvement of the Wits value (+3.8 mm), SNA (+5°), and ANB (+3°). Dentally, a transversal postdevelopment in the maxilla (+4 mm) and a labial tip of the maxillary (+3.4°) and mandibular anterior teeth (+4.7°) with gap formation is observed. CONCLUSION: The MIRA appliance represents a less invasive and esthetic alternative to the existing concepts, especially with two miniscrews in the mandible per side. In addition, MIRA can be selected for complex orthodontic tasks, such as molar uprighting and mesialization.

Precision of slot widths and torque transmission of in-office 3D printed brackets : An in vitro study.

PURPOSE: To investigate a novel in-office three-dimensionally (3D) printed polymer bracket regarding slot precision and torque transmission. METHODS: Based on a 0.022″ bracket system, stereolithography was used to manufacture brackets (N = 30) from a high-performance polymer that met Medical Device Regulation (MDR) IIa requirements. Conventional metal and ceramic brackets were used for comparison. Slot precision was determined using calibrated plug gages. Torque transmission was measured after artificial aging. Palatal and vestibular crown torques were measured from 0 to 20° using titanium-molybdenum (T) and stainless steel (S) wires (0.019â€³â€¯× 0.025″) in a biomechanical experimental setup. The Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc test (Dunn-Bonferroni) was used for statistical analyses (significance level p < 0.05). RESULTS: The slot sizes of all three bracket groups were within the tolerance range according to DIN 13996 (ceramic [C]: 0.581 ± 0.003 mm; metal [M]: 0.6 ± 0.005 mm; polymer [P]: 0.581 ± 0.010 mm). The maximum torque values of all bracket-arch combinations were above the clinically relevant range of 5-20 Nmm (PS: 30 ± 8.6 Nmm; PT: 27.8 ± 14.2 Nmm; CS: 24 ± 5.6 Nmm; CT: 19.9 ± 3.8 Nmm; MS: 21.4 ± 6.7 Nmm; MT: 16.7 ± 4.6 Nmm). CONCLUSIONS: The novel, in-office manufactured polymer bracket showed comparable results to established bracket materials regarding slot precision and torque transmission. Given its high individualization possibilities as well as enabling an entire in-house supply chain, the novel polymer brackets bear high potential of future usage for orthodontic appliances.

Sliding behaviour and surface quality after static air polishing of conventional and modern bracket materials : In vitro analysis.

OBJECTIVES: As part of orthodontic treatment, air polishing is routinely used for professional tooth cleaning. Thus, we investigated the effects of static powder polishing on sliding behaviour and surface quality of three different bracket materials (polymer, ceramic, metal), including a 3D-printed bracket. METHODS: Two bracket types of each material group were polished with an air-polishing device using sodium bicarbonate. Exposure times were set at 10, 20, and 60 s; the application distance was 5 mm. The force loss due to sliding resistance was tested with an orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS) using a 0.016 inchâ€¯× 0.022 inch stainless steel archwire. Untreated brackets served as control. Polishing effects and slot precision were evaluated using an optical digital and scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: Sliding behaviour and slot precision differed significantly between and within the groups. Prior to polishing, polymer brackets showed the least force loss, ceramic brackets the highest. With progressive polishing time, the resistance increased significantly with titanium brackets (26 to 37%) and decreased significantly with steel brackets (36 to 25%). Polymer brackets showed the smallest changes in force loss with respect to polishing duration. Slot precision showed the largest differences between material groups and was primarily manufacturer-dependent with hardly any changes due to the polishing time. CONCLUSION: Powder polishing can positively or negatively affect the sliding properties of the bracket-archwire complex but is more dependent on the bracket-archwire material combination (i.e., manufacture-dependent slot precision). For titanium brackets, resistance only increased after 60 s of polishing. For ceramic brackets, effective reduction was observed after 10 s of polishing. Polymer brackets, including the 3D-printed brackets, showed better sliding properties than ceramic or metal brackets even after polishing for 60 s. Removal of plaque and dental calculus should lead to a noticeable improvement of the sliding properties and outweighs structural defects that may develop.

Orthodontic extrusion in the digital age: a technical note.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this case series was to test various personalized, CAD/CAM-manufactured orthodontic extrusion appliances. The appliances were characterized by high rigidity and manufacturing precision. In addition, the orthodontic force vector could be precisely and three-dimensionally planned. METHOD AND MATERIALS: After a comprehensive diagnosis of three patients with deep fractured teeth by an interdisciplinary team, each patient's personalized extrusion protocol was determined (slow or rapid extrusion). Based on an intraoral scan, the personalized extrusion appliances were then digitally planned and manufactured using selective laser melting. The force vector was also precisely planned during this process. The appliances were inserted, and the force on the teeth to be extruded was precisely applied in accordance with the extrusion protocol. After extrusion, the teeth were retained and, if necessary, permanently restored. RESULTS: The target teeth of all three patients were successfully extruded. Furthermore, good cleanability and high wearing comfort of the appliances were maintained throughout treatment, as was the precise application of force. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of the tested digital workflow for precise and simplified orthodontic extrusion was clinically proven. The workflow guaranteed the following throughout treatment: precise planning and application of the force system; improved periodontal hygiene; and improved wearing comfort of the appliance, without affecting the patient's existing occlusion.

Comparative in vitro analysis of the sliding resistance of a modern 3D-printed polymer bracket in combination with different archwire types.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the sliding resistance of a modern 3D-printed polymer bracket combined with different archwire types and to compare the results with conventionally used polymeric, ceramic and metal brackets. It was of further interest which bracket-archwire combination could be best qualified for clinical use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sliding behaviour was tested using an orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS) for the use of two bracket types of the polymer, ceramic and metal group in combination with a 0.016 inch × 0.022 inch and 0.017 inch × 0.025 inch archwire of nickel-titanium (NiTi), titanium-molybdenum alloy (TMA) and stainless steel. Six bracket types were combined with six different archwire types and compared to each other. RESULTS: The sliding resistance showed significant differences between various the bracket-archwire complexes. The combination of 3D-printed polymer brackets with both steel archwire cross-sections showed the least values of sliding resistance (average 23-29%), while the combination of ceramic brackets with TMA archwires presented the highest (average 47%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study could show that modern 3D-printed bracket materials can have similar or even better mechanical properties than conventional ones regarding sliding resistance. Although the combination of bracket and archwire material is decisive for low sliding resistance values, the selection of the bracket material seems to have a greater influence than the selection of the archwire material or its cross section. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It might be possible in future to combine aesthetic and biomechanical requirements for aesthetic brackets by using 3D-printing technology.

Mechanical properties of CAD/CAM-fabricated in comparison to conventionally fabricated functional regulator 3 appliances.

Manufacturing of Fränkel's functional regulator 3 (FR3) is complicated and requires extensive knowledge from the dental technician. To determine whether FR3s produced by CAD/CAM techniques (CAD-FR3) meet similar mechanical properties like conventional FR3s (Con-FR3), for each of 10 patient cases, three CAD-FR3 designs (palatal connector cross-section 3 × 3 mm, 4 × 1 mm or 5 × 2 mm) and one Con-FR3 were subjected to cyclic loading and subsequent fracture testing in a universal testing device. Transversal load capacity (Fmax(FR3)) and stiffness were compared among the different CAD-FR3 designs and Con-FR3s using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests with a significance level of α = 0.05. All CAD-FR3 designs had significantly higher mean Fmax(FR3) (p ≤ 0.007) and stiffness (p ≤ 0.005) than the Con-FR3s. The CAD-FR33×3 had the highest mean Fmax(FR3) (98.2 ± 26.2 N) and stiffness (37.1 ± 15.5 N/mm), closely followed by the CAD-FR35×2 (Fmax(FR3): 90.3 ± 24.7 N; stiffness: 30.0 ± 12.3 N/mm). Among the CAD appliances, CAD-FR34×1 had the lowest values (p ≤ 0.007 for all pairwise tests) with Fmax(FR3) of 45.8 ± 17.9 N and stiffness of 12.5 ± 7.3 N/mm. CAD-FR3s have superior mechanical properties in comparison to Con-FR3s if certain design parameters are followed. Further clinical investigations have to examine if they can serve as an alternative in practice.