Metallic vs Ceramic Bracket Failures After 12 Months of Treatment: A Prospective Clinical Trial
- PMID: 38744578
- PMCID: PMC11551554
- DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2024.04.023
Metallic vs Ceramic Bracket Failures After 12 Months of Treatment: A Prospective Clinical Trial
Abstract
Introduction: Orthodontic treatment with fixed vestibular appliances is still widely used worldwide. When choosing the aesthetic alternative of ceramic brackets, the possibility of failure and cracking of braces should be considered. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the failure rates of ceramic and metal brackets in a 12-month clinical study.
Methods: Eighty patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment with vestibular appliances were enrolled and divided into 2 equal groups: MET for metal brackets and CER for ceramic brackets. After bonding, bracket failures were recorded for 12 months, along with the archwire placed at the time of failure. Angle's dental class, skeletal class, Wits appraisal, Little's irregularity index, overjet, overbite, age, and gender of the patients were recorded from pretreatment cephalometric tracings and study casts. The data were statistically analysed (P < .05).
Results: Significantly higher failure rates were found for ceramic brackets in the overall analysis, in the mandibular arch, and in the posterior region. Regression analysis revealed a significant influence of round nickel-titanium archwires on higher failure rates, whilst a significant influence of rectangular archwires was found on lower failure rates.
Conclusions: Ceramic brackets showed higher failure rates. Patients should be aware that orthodontic treatment with ceramic brackets may involve delays and inconvenience due to the higher failure rate compared to metal brackets.
Keywords: Ceramic brackets; Clinical trial; Failure rate; Fixed appliance; Metallic brackets; Orthodontic treatment; Survival analysis.
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Oct;124(4):403-9. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00501-8. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003. PMID: 14560270
-
In vitro evaluation of frictional forces between archwires and ceramic brackets.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Jan;125(1):56-64. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.01.005. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004. PMID: 14718880
-
Frictional resistances using Teflon-coated ligatures with various bracket-archwire combinations.Angle Orthod. 1995;65(1):63-72; discussion 73-4. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1995)065<0063:FRUTLW>2.0.CO;2. Angle Orthod. 1995. PMID: 7726464
-
An in vivo study on the incidence and location of fracture in round orthodontic archwires.J Orthod. 2013 Dec;40(4):307-12. doi: 10.1179/1465313313Y.0000000062. J Orthod. 2013. PMID: 24297962
-
Comparison of galvanic corrosion potential of metal injection molded brackets to that of conventional metal brackets with nickel-titanium and copper nickel-titanium archwire combinations.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2013 May 1;14(3):488-95. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1350. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2013. PMID: 24171995
Cited by
-
Comparison of Upper Central Incisor Torque in the ClinCheck® with and without CBCT Integration: A Cross-Sectional Study.Dent J (Basel). 2024 Aug 20;12(8):269. doi: 10.3390/dj12080269. Dent J (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39195113 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Keim RG, Vogels III DS, Vogels PB. 2020 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures part 1: results and trends. J Clin Orthod. 2020;54(10):581–610. - PubMed
-
- Jeremiah HG, Bister D, Newton JT. Social perceptions of adults wearing orthodontic appliances: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33:476–482. - PubMed
-
- Metin-Gürsoy G, Haciomeroglu AB, Kale-Varlık S, Tortop T. Evaluation of the relationship between anxiety levels and dental appearance. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2023;47:40–45. - PubMed
-
- Ziuchkovski JP, Fields HW, Johnston WM, Lindsey DT. Assessment of perceived orthodontic appliance attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133(4 Suppl):S68–S78. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous