Evaluation of clear aligners attachment success rate with different composite types

Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Ahmed; Mostafa Magdi Abdelmonem AbdelAllah; Esmail Kamal Hewy Raslan; Wesameldin Rafaat Ali Gouda; Mostafa Mohamad Mahmoud Dawaba; Ibrahim Saad Abd El-Ghafar; Ahmed Mahmoud Ahmed Ali; Marwa Hassan Abdelmonem

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v5nS2.13071

Authors

Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Ahmed Asst. Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Mostafa Magdi Abdelmonem AbdelAllah Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Esmail Kamal Hewy Raslan Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Wesameldin Rafaat Ali Gouda
wesamguda.el.8.540@azhar.edu.eg
Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Mostafa Mohamad Mahmoud Dawaba Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Ibrahim Saad Abd El-Ghafar Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Ahmed Mahmoud Ahmed Ali Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch), Egypt
Marwa Hassan Abdelmonem Lecturer of orthodontic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of dental medicine for girls, Al-Azhar University, Egypt

Keywords:

evaluation, aligners attachment, composite types

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the survival rate of clear aligner attachment using different composite types. Twelve patients ranging from 15 to 25 years old participated in this research. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to one of two groups: packable composite, which contained packable composite attachments, or flowable composite, which included flowable composite attachments. There was no statistical difference in attachment failures between the two groups for all cases (2 = 3.003, P = 0.083) and individual cases. However, failures occurred in 75% of the FC group vs. 55.6% for the PC group (categorical data were compared using the Chi-Square or Fisher's exact test). According to the findings of this research, the composite type, whether packable or flowable, did not affect attachment failure.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barbagallo LJ, ShenG, JonesAS, Swain MV, Petocz P, Darendeliler MA. A novel pressure ﬁlm approach for determining the force imparted by clear removable thermoplastic appliances. Ann Biomed Eng. 2008; 36:335-41.

Barbosa IV, Ladewig VM, Almeida-Pedrin RR, Cardoso MA, Santiago Junior JF, Conti A. The association between patient's compliance and age with the bonding failure of orthodontic brackets: a cross-sectional study. Prog Orthod.2018; 19(1):11.

Boyd RL. Predictability of successful orthodontic treatment using Invisalign. The Greater Philadelphia Society of Orthodontists page. [http://www.gpso.org/events/2003_outline.pdf.].

Bradley TG, Teske L, Eliades G, Zinelis S, Eliades T. Do the mechanical and chemical properties of Invisalign appliances change after use? A retrieval analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015.

Cal-Neto JP, Quintao CA, Almeida MA, Miguel JA. Bond failure rates with a self-etching primer: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135: 782–6.

Hahn W, Dathe H, Fialka-Fricke J, Fricke-Zec S, Zapf A, Kubein-Meesenburg D, et al. Inﬂuence of thermoplastic appliance thickness on the magnitude of force delivered to a maxillary central incisor during tipping. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2009; 136:12-17.

Hahn W, Engelke B, Jung K, Dathe H, Fialka-Fricke J, Kubein-Meesenburg D, et al. Initial forces and moments delivered by removable thermoplastic appliances during rotation of an upper central incisor. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80:239-46.

Hammad SM, El Banna MS, Elsaka SE. The twelve-month bracket failure rate with amorphous calcium phosphate bonding system. Eur J Orthod. 2013; 35:622–627.

Mohammed RE, Abass S, Abubakr NH, Mohammed ZM. Comparing orthodontic bond failures of light-cured composite resin with chemical-cured composite resin: a 12-month clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 150:290– 294.

Roelofs T, Merkens N, Roelofs J, Bronkhorst E, Breuning H. A retrospective survey of the causes of bracket- and tubebonding failures. Angle Orthod. 2017; 87:111–117.

Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, Deregibus A, Debernadi CL. Efficacy of Clear-aligners in Controlling Orthodontic Tooth Movement - A Systematic Review, Angle Orthod. 2014, Nov 20.

Serin BA, Yazicioglu I, Deveci C, Dogan MC. Clinical evaluation of a self-adhering flowable composite as an occlusal restorative material in primary molars: one-year results. Eur Oral Res. 2019; 53:119–124.

Simon M, Keilig L, Schwarze J, Jung BA, Bourauel C. Forces and moments generated by removable thermoplastic aligners: incisor torque, premolar derotation, and molar distalization. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014; 145:728-36.

Steiner R, Edelhoff D, Stawarczyk B, Dumfahrt H, Lente I. Effect of dentin bonding agents, various resin composites and curing modes on bond strength to human dentin. 2019; 12:3395.

Vardimon AD, Robbins D, Brosh T. In-vivo von Mises strains during Invisalign treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010; 138:399-409.

Werner S, Julia H. Aligner Orthodontics, Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd, London, UK. 2016; 2: 28.

Ziuchkovski JP, Fields HW, Johnston WM, Lindsey DT. Assessment of perceived orthodontic appliance attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2008; 133:68-78.