scholarly journals Torque expression of self-ligating brackets compared with conventional metallic, ceramic, and plastic brackets

2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Morina ◽  
T. Eliades ◽  
N. Pandis ◽  
A. Jager ◽  
C. Bourauel
Keyword(s):  
Plastic Brackets

scholarly journals Surface roughness of three types of modern plastic bracket slot floors and frictional resistance

2013 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sung-Hwan Choi ◽  
Da-Young Kang ◽  
Chung–Ju Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Frictional Resistance ◽  
Lower Surface ◽  
Reinforced Plastic ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
Sliding Test ◽  
Plastic Brackets

ABSTRACT Objective: To quantitatively analyze the surface roughness of the slot floors of three types of modern plastic brackets and to measure static frictional force during sliding mechanics in vitro. Materials and Methods: Control groups comprised stainless steel brackets and monocrystalline ceramic brackets. Test groups comprised three types of 0.022-in slot, Roth prescription, plastic, maxillary right central incisor brackets. Test groups included glass fiber-reinforced polycarbonate, filler-reinforced polycarbonate, and hybrid polymer with inserted metal slot brackets. The static frictional resistance caused by sliding movements with an archwire (stainless steel) in vitro was quantitatively analyzed. Both scanning electron microscope and three-dimensional optical surface profiling were used. Results: Scanning electron microscope and three-dimensional optical surface profiler revealed that all as-received brackets had irregular slot floor surfaces, and both irregularity and roughness increased after the archwire sliding test. The ceramic brackets in the control group showed significantly lower surface roughness values and higher frictional values during the archwire sliding test compared with the other brackets. The glass or filler-reinforced plastic brackets exhibited significantly higher static frictional values than the metallic slot type brackets (P < .001). The hybrid polymer with inserted metal slot brackets showed relatively lower surface roughness and frictional values compared with the stainless steel control bracket. Conclusion: Glass or filler-reinforced plastic brackets showed higher frictional resistance than metallic slot–type brackets. A plastic bracket with inserted metal slot may be the best choice among plastic brackets for low frictional resistance and to avoid damage from sliding movements of the archwire.

scholarly journals Laboratory evaluation of modern plastic brackets

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 595-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Ali ◽  
M. Makou ◽  
T. Papadopoulos ◽  
G. Eliades
Keyword(s):  
Laboratory Evaluation ◽  
Plastic Brackets

scholarly journals Variations in orthodontic bracket retention related to base design. Comparison of foil mesh and anchor pylons brackets

2016 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 680-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Gibas-Stanek ◽  
Stephen Williams ◽  
Wojciech I. Ryniewicz ◽  
Bartłomiej W. Loster
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Orthodontic Bracket ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bonding Properties ◽  
Student’S T ◽  
Plastic Brackets ◽  
Bracket Base ◽  
Base Design

Aim of the study. To compare the shear bond strength of metal brackets with foil mesh (3M, Victory Series), one piece metal brackets (Cannon Ultra) and aesthetic plastic brackets (Cannon Ultra) and to evaluate the sandblasting effect on previously used metal bracket bases regarding their bonding ability. Materials and Methods.A total of seventy human third molars were divided into four groups, and brackets were bonded to the enamel using Transbond XT. After 24 hours of storage, brackets were debonded with Instron Universal Testing Machine® and shear bond strength was recorded. Metal brackets were sandblasted until all visible bonding material was removed from the bracket base and then the bonding procedure and shear bond testing were repeated. Shapiro-Wilk test was used to check normal distribution. Student’s t-test was used to compare the shear bond strength. Results. The shear bond strength of one-piece metal brackets is significantly bigger (18.93MPa) than metal brackets with foil mesh (12.53MPa). Metal brackets in general demonstrate better bonding properties than aesthetic plastic brackets (8.61MPa). There is no statistically significant difference in shear bond strength between new and re-used sandblasted brackets. Conclusions. One-piece brackets with anchor pylons demonstrate better bonding properties but there is a higher risk of enamel damage during debonding of re-used sandblasted brackets.

Design of Energy Absorbing Plastic Brackets to Meet Rear Crash Regulation ECE R42

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Praveen Kumar ◽  
Devendra Sankla ◽  
Pushparaj Arumugam
Keyword(s):  
Energy Absorbing ◽  
Plastic Brackets

New direct bonding system for plastic brackets

1971 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 350-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fujio Miura ◽  
Kazuhiko Nakagawa ◽  
Eichi Masuhara
Keyword(s):  
Bonding System ◽  
Plastic Brackets

Shear bond strengths of orthodontic plastic brackets

2000 ◽  
Vol 117 (4) ◽  
pp. 438-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Guan ◽  
Teruko Takano-Yamamoto ◽  
Manabu Miyamoto ◽  
Tetsuo Hattori ◽  
Kunio Ishikawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strengths ◽  
Plastic Brackets

Innovation in Skeletal II Treatment Including Effective Incisor Root Torque in a Prelimary Removable Appliance Phase

1976 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 223-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neville M. Bass
Keyword(s):  
Growth Pattern ◽  
Maxillary Incisor ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Facial Growth ◽  
Transparent Plastic ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Removable Appliance ◽  
Root Apices ◽  
Plastic Brackets

A new removable appliance design is presented which offers the possibility of significant palatal movement of the maxillary incisor roots and which is capable of producing marked changes in the position of the root apices. Heavy extra-oral forces may be applied through the appliance to the entire maxilla to orthopaedically change the facial growth pattern and ameliorate the Skeletal II problem, with the torquing movements being carried out concurrently. A second phase of Edgewise treatment, often with directly bonded transparent plastic brackets, is then carried out to complete the correction. This stage is much reduced in complexity and may be confined to alignments and detailing of the occlusion over a relatively short period of time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document