A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial

André da Costa Monini,Luiz Gonzaga Gandini Júnior,Alexandre Protásio Vianna,Renato Parsekian Martins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7

2016-05-31

Clinical Oral Investigations

Abstract:ObjectiveTo evaluate the rate of lower canine retraction, anchorage loss, and changes on lower canines and first molars axial inclination using self-ligating and conventional brackets.Materials and methodsTwenty-five adult patients with a treatment plan involving extractions of four first premolars were selected for this split-mouth trial and had either conventional or self-ligating brackets bonded to lower canines in a block randomization. Retraction was accomplished using 100-g nickel titanium closed-coil springs, which were reactivated each 4 weeks. Oblique radiographs were taken before and after total canine retraction and the cephalograms were superimposed on stable structures of the mandible. Cephalometric points were digitized twice by a single-blinded operator for error control and the average of the points were used to determine the following variables: canine cusp horizontal changes, molar cusp horizontal changes, and angulation changes in canines and molars. Paired t tests were used to analyze the blinded data for group differences.ResultsAll patients reached final phase without bracket debonds. No differences were found between the two groups for all variables tested. No serious harm was observed.ConclusionBoth brackets showed the same rate of canine retraction and loss of anteroposterior anchorage of the molars. No changes were found between brackets regarding the inclination of canines and first molars.Clinical RelevanceUsing self-ligating brackets to retract lower canines will not increase the velocity of tooth movement, does not increase anchorage, and does not decrease tipping.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine