The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2014 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Maxillary Dental Arch changes following the Leveling and Alignment Stage with Lingual and Labial Orthodontic Appliances: A Preliminary Report of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Mohammad Y Hajeer, Tarek Z Khattab, Hassan Farah, Rabab Al-Sabbagh

Citation Information : Hajeer MY, Khattab TZ, Farah H, Al-Sabbagh R. Maxillary Dental Arch changes following the Leveling and Alignment Stage with Lingual and Labial Orthodontic Appliances: A Preliminary Report of a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014; 15 (5):561-566.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1579

Published Online: 01-10-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Background

No randomized controlled trial has tried to compare transverse dental arch changes between the lingual and labial orthodontic fixed appliances in the early stage of treatment.

Objective

To compare upper dental arch changes between lingual and labial fixed orthodontic appliances after leveling and alignment.

Design, setting

Parallel-groups randomized controlled trial on patients with class I moderate crowding teeth treated at the University of Al-Baath Dental School in Hamah, Syria.

Participants

About 102 patients with crowded teeth and class I malocclusion were evaluated and 58 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Randomization was performed using computer generated tables; allocation was concealed using sequentially numbered opaque and sealed envelopes. About 52 participants were analyzed (mean age 21.5 ± 3.2 years). They were randomly distributed into two groups with 26 patients in each (1:1 allocation ratio).

Intervention

Lingual vs labial fixed orthodontic appliances were used.

Main outcome measure

Intercanine width, interpremolar width, intermolar width, and arch length were measured on study models before brackets’ placement (T1), at the end of leveling and alignment stage (T2).

Results

Statistically significant increase was detected in the intercanine width in the lingual group (1.99 mm, p < 0.001) and in the labial group (1.22 mm, p < 0.001). The interpremolar width had a significant decrease in the lingual group (–0.70 mm, p < 0.001), whereas there was a significant increase in this width in the labial group (1.73 mm, p < 0.001). A significant decrease in intermolar width was detected in the lingual group (–0.79 mm, p < 0.001) whereas a significant increase was observed in the labial group (0.81 mm, p < 0.001). The differences between the two groups were significant for all comparisons (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The labial appliance produced a significant increase in all horizontal transverse arch dimensions, whereas in the lingual appliance group the intercanine width increased significantly in conjunction with a significant narrowing of posterior segments.

Funding

The University of Al-Baath Postgraduate Research Budget (UBDS-00786223-PG).

How to cite this article

Khattab TZ, Hajeer MY, Farah H, Al-Sabbagh R. Maxillary Dental Arch changes following the Leveling and Alignment Stage with Lingual and Labial Orthodontic Appliances: A Preliminary Report of a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(5):561-566.


PDF Share
  1. Lingual orthodontics: a status report. Part 4: Diagnosis and treatment planning. J Clin Orthod 1983 Jan;17(1):26-35.
  2. Keys to success in lingual therapy. Part 1. J Clin Orthod 1986 Apr;20(4):252-261.
  3. Lingual orthodontics in adults. Melson B, editor. Current controversies in orthodontics. Chicago: Quintessence; 1991.
  4. Lingual orthodontics: historical perspective. Romano R, editor. Lingual orthodontics. Lewiston (NY): BC Decker; 1998. p. 8-11.
  5. Customized indirect bonding method for lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 1996 Nov;30(11):650-652.
  6. New indirect bonding method for lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 2000;34:348-350.
  7. Lingual treatment with the bending art system. Romano R, editor. Lingual orthodontics. Lewiston (NY): BC Decker; 1998. p. 185-193.
  8. Present clinical reality. Romano R, editor. Lingual orthodontics. London: Hamilton BC Decker; 1998. p. 22.
  9. New orthodontic treatment with lingual brackets and mushroom arch wire appliance. Am J Orthod 1979 Dec;76(6):657-675.
  10. Trattamenti ortodontici a collocazione linguale. Mondo Ortodontico 1984;3:14-27.
  11. JCO/interviews Dr Vincent M. Kelly on lingual orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 1982 Jul;16(7):461-476.
  12. Lingual orthodontics: a status report. Part 7A. Case report—nonextraction, consolidation. J Clin Orthod 1983 May;17(15):310-331.
  13. Concepts on control of the anterior teeth using the lingual appliance. Semin Orthod 2006;12:178-185.
  14. Vertical forces in labial and lingual orthodontics applied on maxillary incisors: a theoretical approach. Angle Orthod 2004;74(2):195-201.
  15. Efficiency of multi-strand steel, superelastic NiTi and ion-implanted NiTi archwires for initial alignment. Clin Orthod Res 1998 Aug;1(1):12-19.
  16. Multiflex versus superelastic: a randomized clinical trial of the tooth alignment ability of initial arch wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995 Nov;108(5):464-471.
  17. Frictional forces in fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989 Sep;96(3):249-254.
  18. Present horizons and a future outlook on lingual approach. Proceedings and abstracts: First Congress of the European Society of Lingual Orthodontics, Lido di Venezia; 1993 June. p. 18-20.
  19. Maxillary arch changes during leveling and aligning with fixed appliances and low-friction ligatures. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006 Jul;130(1):88-91.
  20. Indirect bonding with TARG1TR system in lingual orthodontics: laboratory procedures. J Turkish Orthod 2003;16:71-81.
  21. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd; 1940. p. 122-132.
  22. An overall view of the different laboratory procedures used in conjunction with lingual orthodontics. Semin Orthod 2006;12:203-210.
  23. Extraction vs nonextraction: arch widths and smile esthetics. Angle Orthod 2003 Aug;73(4):354-358.
  24. A comparative study of dental arch widths: extraction and nonextraction treatment. Eur J Orthod 2005 Dec;27(6):585-589.
  25. The first stage of comprehensive treatment: alignment and leveling: 4th ed. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM, editors. Contemporary orthodontics. St Louis: Mosby; 2007. 556 p.
  26. A comparative assessment of torque generated by lingual and conventional brackets. Eur J Orthod 2012;35: 82-86.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.