Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Comparing the rotational control during canine retraction using two different bracket systems – Synergy and Self Ligating brackets – Split mouth study
View through CrossRef
Canine, being the cornerstone of the dental arches, shares an important role in oral functions, esthetics, arch shape and stability. With the new bracket systems that have come to light, which have reduced friction, there is not much literature on how much of a rotation control they have on the cuspids. Hence this study is conducted to compare the efficiency of two least frictional resistance offering brackets – Self-ligating and synergy brackets in terms of rotational control. The study was designed as a prospective randomized controlled split-mouth clinical trial, which included 16 subjects of ages 12-30 years, divided into two groups, left, and the right quadrants receiving Self Ligating and Synergy brackets based on simple randomization, along with a 19*25" SS wire and closed coil springs for individual canine retraction. The patients were reviewed every 21 days for four appointments, and records were taken for each review. Photographs were taken of the cast at every review, and the degree of canine rotation was measured and compared. The results indicate that there is no statistical difference between both the groups in the amount of canine rotation during individual canine retraction with a p-value greater than 0.05 at every interval. The results also indicate that there is a significant amount of canine rotation in Group 1 – Self-ligating brackets and Group 2 – Synergy brackets independently, when comparing T0 to every interval. Overall results show that there is no significant statistical difference between Synergy and Self-Ligating brackets in the amount of canine rotation during canine retraction. The mean or average amount of canine rotation for Group I Self-ligating was 3.32º ±6.55°. The mean or average amount of canine rotation for Group 2 Synergy was 4.08º ±3.85°.
Title: Comparing the rotational control during canine retraction using two different bracket systems – Synergy and Self Ligating brackets – Split mouth study
Description:
Canine, being the cornerstone of the dental arches, shares an important role in oral functions, esthetics, arch shape and stability.
With the new bracket systems that have come to light, which have reduced friction, there is not much literature on how much of a rotation control they have on the cuspids.
Hence this study is conducted to compare the efficiency of two least frictional resistance offering brackets – Self-ligating and synergy brackets in terms of rotational control.
The study was designed as a prospective randomized controlled split-mouth clinical trial, which included 16 subjects of ages 12-30 years, divided into two groups, left, and the right quadrants receiving Self Ligating and Synergy brackets based on simple randomization, along with a 19*25" SS wire and closed coil springs for individual canine retraction.
The patients were reviewed every 21 days for four appointments, and records were taken for each review.
Photographs were taken of the cast at every review, and the degree of canine rotation was measured and compared.
The results indicate that there is no statistical difference between both the groups in the amount of canine rotation during individual canine retraction with a p-value greater than 0.
05 at every interval.
The results also indicate that there is a significant amount of canine rotation in Group 1 – Self-ligating brackets and Group 2 – Synergy brackets independently, when comparing T0 to every interval.
Overall results show that there is no significant statistical difference between Synergy and Self-Ligating brackets in the amount of canine rotation during canine retraction.
The mean or average amount of canine rotation for Group I Self-ligating was 3.
32º ±6.
55°.
The mean or average amount of canine rotation for Group 2 Synergy was 4.
08º ±3.
85°.
Related Results
Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets
Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets
Abstract
Objective:
To compare the rates of retraction down an archwire of maxillary canine teeth when bracketed with a self-ligating bracket was used ...
Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets
Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets
Abstract
Background
Active self-ligating brackets may be more efficient than conventional pre-adjusted brackets.
...
Evaluation of the frictional resistance between different bracket types, archwires and ligation materials: An in-vitro study
Evaluation of the frictional resistance between different bracket types, archwires and ligation materials: An in-vitro study
In orthodontic treatment, brackets need to slide along the archwire to allow for alignment of the teeth. The lesser the friction between the bracket and the archwire, the easier it...
Comparative Evaluation of Gingival Displacement by Using Retraction Paste and Retraction Cord- In-Vivo Pilot Study
Comparative Evaluation of Gingival Displacement by Using Retraction Paste and Retraction Cord- In-Vivo Pilot Study
Marginal integrity is one of the important principles of Tooth preparation. To achieve this, a satisfactory gingival displacement procedure is necessary. Aim of this study was to d...
The Influence of Bracket Torque on External Apical Root Resorption in Bimaxillary Protrusion Patients: A Retrospective Study
The Influence of Bracket Torque on External Apical Root Resorption in Bimaxillary Protrusion Patients: A Retrospective Study
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the difference in root resorption between standard torque self-ligating brackets and high torque self-ligating brackets in bimaxillary prot...
Porcelain brackets during initial alignment: are self-ligating cosmetic brackets more efficient?
Porcelain brackets during initial alignment: are self-ligating cosmetic brackets more efficient?
Abstract
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of a self-ligating (SL) porcelain bracket with a conventional porcelain (...
Comparing the rate of retraction in canines in males and females
Comparing the rate of retraction in canines in males and females
There are multiple factors that affect the treatment duration and the rate of canine retraction between males and females. A difference in the levels of calcitonin and the maintena...
INFLUENCE OF THE TYPE OF BRACKET ON MICROBIAL COLONIZATION AND GENGIVAL CLINICAL CONDITION
INFLUENCE OF THE TYPE OF BRACKET ON MICROBIAL COLONIZATION AND GENGIVAL CLINICAL CONDITION
It was hypothesized that patients using conventional brackets have greater bacterial colonization and worse gingival clinical condition compared to those using self-ligating bracke...

