Abstract:Initial arch wires are the first arch wires inserted into fixed appliance at the beginning of orthodontic treatment. With a number of different types of orthodontic arch wires available for initial tooth alignment, it is important to understand which are most efficient and which cause the least amount of root resorption and pain during the initial aligning stage of treatment. This is the third update of a Cochrane review first published in 2010. To assess the effects of initial arch wires for the alignment of teeth with fixed orthodontic braces, in terms of the rate of tooth alignment, amount of root resorption accompanying tooth movement, and intensity of pain experienced by patients during the initial alignment stage of treatment. We searched Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two ongoing trials registries on 4 July 2022. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of different initial arch wires used to align teeth with fixed orthodontic braces. We included people with full‐arch fixed orthodontic appliances on the upper arch, lower arch, or both arches. Two independent review authors were responsible for study selection, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias in included studies. We contacted corresponding authors of included studies to obtain missing information. We resolved disagreements by discussion between the review authors. Our main outcomes were alignment rate (movement of teeth in mm), root resorption, time to alignment, and intensity of pain measured on a 100‐mm visual analogue scale (VAS). We pooled data from studies with similar interventions and outcomes using random‐effects models. We reported mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data, risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs for dichotomous data, and alignment rate ratios with 95% CIs for time‐to‐event data. Two independent review authors assessed the certainty of evidence. We resolved disagreements by discussion between the review authors. We included 29 RCTs with 1915 participants (2581 arches) in this review. Studies were generally small (sample sizes ranged from 14 to 200 participants). Duration of follow‐up varied between three days and six months. Eleven studies received funding, six received no funding, and 12 provided no information about funding sources. We judged eight studies at high risk of bias, nine at low risk, and 12 at unclear risk. We grouped the studies into six main comparisons. Multistrand stainless steel wires versus wires composed of other materials Six studies with 409 participants (545 arches) evaluated multistrand stainless steel (StSt) wires versus wires composed of other materials. We are very uncertain about the effect of multistrand StSt wires versus other wires on alignment rate (4 studies, 281 participants, 417 arches; very low‐certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between multistrand StSt wires and other wires in terms of intensity of pain (MD −2.68 mm, 95% CI −6.75 to 1.38; 2 studies, 127 participants, 127 arches; low‐certainty evidence). Conventional nickel‐titanium wires versus superelastic nickel‐titanium wires Four studies with 266 participants (274 arches) evaluated conventional nickel‐titanium (NiTi) wires versus superelastic NiTi wires. There may be little to no difference between the different wire types in terms of alignment rate (124 participants, 124 arches, 2 studies; low‐certainty evidence) and intensity of pain (MD −0.29 mm, 95% CI −1.10 to 0.52; 2 studies, 142 participants, 150 arches; low‐certainty evidence). Conventional nickel‐titanium wires versus thermoelastic copper‐nickel‐titanium wires Three studies with 210 participants (210 arches) evaluated conventional Ni‐Ti versus thermoelastic copper‐nickel‐titanium (CuNiTi) wires. We are very uncertain about the effects of the different arch wires on alignment rate (1 study, 66 participants, 66 arches; very low‐certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between conventional NiTi wires and thermoelastic CuNiTi wires in terms of time to alignment (alignment rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.50; 1 study, 60 participants, 60 arches; low‐certainty evidence). Superelastic nickel‐titanium wires versus thermoelastic nickel‐titanium wires Twelve studies with 703 participants (936 arches) evaluated superelastic NiTi versus thermoelastic NiTi wires. There may be little to no difference between superelastic NiTi wires and thermoelastic NiTi wires in alignment rate at four weeks (MD −0.28 mm, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.06; 5 studies, 183 participants, 183 arches; low‐certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effects of the different wires on root resorption (2 studies, 52 participants, 312 teeth; very low‐certainty evidence). Superelastic NiTi wires compared with thermoelastic NiTi wires may result in a slight increase in time to alignment (MD 0.5 months, -Abstract Truncated-

Comparison of alignment efficiency of different sizes of superelastic nickel-titanium archwires in the initial phase of fixed orthodontic treatment: A single-center, double-blind randomized clinical trial

Comparison of changes in irregularity and transverse width with nickel-titanium and niobium-titanium-tantalum-zirconium archwires during initial orthodontic alignment in adolescents: A double-blind randomized clinical trial

[Comparison of Mechanical Properties on Different Phase Transformation Points of Nickel-Titanium Orthodontic Wires].

Alveolar bone changes and root resorption concomitant with rectangular NiTi in initial leveling and alignment

Comparing the efficacy of heat-activated NiTi (HANT) versus conventional NiTi archwires: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Initial arch wires used in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

Evaluating the Elemental Composition, Transformation Behavior, Crystalline Structure, and Mechanical Properties of Three 0.016-Inch by 0.022-Inch Nickel-Titanium Archwires: An In Vitro Study

Load-deflection characteristics of superelastic and thermal nickel-titanium wires

Efficiency of clear aligners with nickel titanium wires for treating mandibular incisor crowding

Effect of use of antiseptics and fluorides during orthodontic treatment on working properties of NiTi archwires in levelling dental arches : A randomized controlled trial

Little evidence to guide initial arch wire choice for fixed appliance therapy

Nanomechanical and bending properties of nickel-titanium orthodontics archwires by depth-sensing indentation

Comparison between effects of reverse curve of Spee nickel titanium archwire and stainless steel archwires with and without torque on the lower incisors in deep overbite treatment: a randomized control study

Assessment of Various Archwire Materials and Their Impact on Orthodontic Treatment Outcomes

Influence of bracket-slot design on the forces released by superelastic nickel-titanium alignment wires in different deflection configurations

Comparison of transverse dimensional and incisor changes between wide and narrow orthodontic archwires: a randomized controlled trial

The dimensions of preformed nickel-titanium archwires measured at the bracket positions corresponding to the central incisor, canine, and first molar

Comparison of frictional forces during the initial leveling stage in various combinations of self-ligating brackets and archwires with a custom-designed typodont system

Mechanical Properties and Potential Clinical Implications of Improved Superelastic Orthodontic Archwires: An Observational Study

The Effect of Elastic and Metallic Ligation Methods on the Unloading Forces for Three Different Types of Nickel-Titanium Archwires Inserted Into Metallic Brackets: An In-vitro Study

Comparisons of nanoindentation, 3-point bending, and tension tests for orthodontic wires