Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets

Abstract

Objective: To measure space closure during the retraction of upper permanent canines with self-ligating and conventional brackets.

Materials and methods: Fifteen patients who required maxillary canine retraction into first premolar extraction sites as part of their orthodontic treatment completed this study. In a random split-mouth design, the retraction of upper canines was performed using an elastomeric chain with 150 g of force. The evaluations were performed in dental casts (T0, initial; T1, 4 weeks; T2, 8 weeks; T3, 12 weeks). The amount of movement and the rotation of the canines as well as anchorage loss of the upper first molars were evaluated.

Results: There was no difference between self-ligating and conventional brackets regarding the distal movement of upper canines and mesial movement of first molars (P > .05). Rotation of the upper canines was minimized with self-ligating brackets (P < .05).

Conclusion: Distal movement of the upper canines and anchorage loss of the first molars were similar with both conventional and self-ligating brackets. Rotation of the upper canines during sliding mechanics was minimized with self-ligating brackets.

Figure 1

Clinical views of canine retraction. Conventional bracket: initial (A) and (C) after 3 months of retraction. Self-ligating bracket: (B) initial and (D) after 3 months of retraction.

Figure 2

Measurement of canine rotation: angle between the median palatine suture and the line passing through the distal and mesial contact points of the canines.

Figure 3

The acrylic guide made in the initial dental cast (T0), with two wires extending as far as the mesiopalatal cusp of the first molars. Adaptation of the final dental cast (T3) allowed the measurement of anchorage loss.

Figure 4

Occlusal views of dental casts. (A) Initial and (B) after 3 months of retraction (c  =  conventional bracket, SL  =  self-ligating bracket).