The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 7 ( July, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of Different Bracket's Resistance to Torsional Forces from Archwire

Chaitanya C Khanapure, Salika Ayesha, VJ Anil Kumar, C Deepika, Haseena Ahmed

Citation Information : Khanapure CC, Ayesha S, Kumar VA, Deepika C, Ahmed H. Evaluation of Different Bracket's Resistance to Torsional Forces from Archwire. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (7):564-567.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1890

Published Online: 01-11-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim

The present study was aimed to evaluate the resistance to deformation or fracture of brackets of various materials (ceramic, ceramic reinforced with metal slot, and stainless steel brackets) with archwires during application of torque.

Materials and methods

The sample size included 30 brackets of maxillary right central incisor with slot dimension of 0.022 × 0.028ʺ and made of three materials (10 of each type): (1) Ceramic brackets (cer), (2) ceramic brackets reinforced with stainless steel slot (cer/ss), and (3) stainless steel brackets (metal). Thirty stainless steel archwire segments of 0.019 × 0.025ʺ SS 5 cm in length were used. Elastomeric ties were also used in this study.

Results

Highest to lowest deformation or fracture torque found is as follows: Stainless steel brackets (5713.2 gfmm), metal ceramic reinforced with metal slot brackets (4080.8 gfmm), and ceramic brackets (3476 gfmm).

Conclusion

Stainless steel brackets showed significantly higher values of torsional load than ceramic brackets reinforced with metal slot and ceramic brackets.

Clinical significance

Clinically orthodontic treatment is based on specific force applications to the dentition, the maxilla and the mandible. In order to obtain these forces, orthodontic brackets are attached to the teeth. Most commonly used brackets are metal (stainless steel), ceramic, and combination of metal reinforced ceramic brackets. For successful orthodontic treatment, it is necessary to maintain proper torque and avoid torque loss. Torque loss leads to deepening of bite. Torque loss occurs due to many reasons, one of them being bracket failure to withstand applied torque.

How to cite this article

Khanapure CC, Ayesha S, Sam G, Kumar VJA, Deepika C, Ahmed H. Evaluation of Different Bracket's Resistance to Torsional Forces from Archwire. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(7):564-567.

PDF Share
  1. Brittle fracture behavior of ceramics. Ceram Bull 1988;67(2):392-401.
  2. Deformation of metal brackets: a comparative study. Angle Orthod 1994;64(4):283-290.
  3. Enamel surface abrasion from ceramic orthodontic brackets: a special case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989 Dec;96(6):514-518.
  4. Fracture resistance of ceramic brackets during arch wire torsion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991 Apr;99(4):287-293.
  5. Fracture toughness and surface cracks—the key to understanding ceramic brackets. Angle Orthod 1988 Jan;58(1):5-8.
  6. Ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod 1988 Feb;22(2):82-88.
  7. Ceramic bracket fracture resistance to second-order arch wire activations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994 Nov;106(5):481-486.
  8. Fracture strengths of ceramic brackets subjected to mesial-distal archwire tipping forces. Angle Orthod 1992 Spring;62(1):67-76.
  9. Torque expression in stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod 2010 Jan;80(1):201-210.
  10. Variability of effective root torque as a function of edge bevel on orthodontic arch wires. Am J Orthod 1984 Jul;86(1):43-50.
  11. Torque expression of self-ligating brackets compared with conventional metallic, ceramic, and plastic brackets. Eur J Orthod 2008 Jun;30(3):233-238.
  12. Torque stability of plastic brackets following multiple loading and artificial material aging: an in-vitro comparison. J Orofacial Orthop 2009 Sep;7(5):385-395.
  13. Evaluation of esthetic brackets resistance to torsional forces from the arch wire. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009 Jan;135(1):42-48.
  14. Measurement of plastic and elastic deformation due to third order torque in self-ligated orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011 Sep;140(3):326-339.
  15. Major deformation and warping of the bracket slot in select selfligating orthodontic brackets due to an applied third order torque. J Orthod 2012 Mar;39(1):25-33.
  16. The measurement and analysis of moments applied by a light wire torquing auxiliary and how these moments change magnitude with respect to various changes in configuration and application. Am J Orthod 1967 Jul;53(7):492-513.
  17. Forces produced by auxiliary torqueing springs in the Begg technique. Br J Orthod 1991 Aug;18(3):219-223.
  18. Faciolingual tooth movement: its influence on the root and cortical plate. Am J Orthod 1973 Sep;64(3):278-302.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.