alexa Comparison of three different orthodontic wires for bonded lingual retainer fabrication.



Author(s): Baysal A, Uysal T, Gul N, Alan MB, Ramoglu SI

Abstract Share this page

Abstract OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the detachment force, amount of deformation, fracture mode, and pull-out force of 3 different wires used for bonded lingual retainer fabrication. METHODS: We tested 0.0215-inch five-stranded wire (PentaOne, Masel; group I), 0.016 × 0.022-inch dead-soft eight-braided wire (Bond-A-Braid, Reliance; group II), and 0.0195-inch dead-soft coaxial wire (Respond, Ormco; group III). To test detachment force, deformation, and fracture mode, we embedded 94 lower incisor teeth in acrylic blocks in pairs. Retainer wires were bonded to the teeth and vertically directed force was applied to the wire. To test pull-out force, wires were embedded in composite that was placed in a hole at the center of an acrylic block. Tensile force was applied along the long axis of the wire. RESULTS: Detachment force and mode of fracture were not different between groups. Deformation was significantly higher in groups II and III than in group I (p < 0.001). Mean pull-out force was significantly higher for group I compared to groups II and III (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Detachment force and fracture mode were similar for all wires, but greater deformations were seen in dead-soft wires. Wire pull-out force was significantly higher for five-stranded coaxial wire than for the other wires tested. Five-stranded coaxial wires are suggested for use in bonded lingual retainers.
This article was published in Korean J Orthod and referenced in Dentistry

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version