Document Type : Original Article
Authors
Speciality in Orthodontics, Dept. of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran.
Abstract
Background: Bonded lingual retainers (BLRs) are essential in orthodontics to maintain post-treatment alignment, particularly for mandibular and maxillary anterior teeth. The mechanical properties of the wires used in BLRs significantly influence their performance and longevity.
Purpose: This study evaluates the mechanical characteristics of three wire types commonly used in BLRs including Coaxial, Dead Soft, and Multi-Strand Retainer wires.
Materials and Method: This in vitro study was description-analytical. A total of 120 extracted human premolar teeth (60 dental double blocks and 60 acrylic blocks) were divided into three groups based on wire type. Teeth were prepared using standard etching and bonding procedures, followed by wire placement and curing. Mechanical tests, including detachment force evaluation, fracture mode analysis, deformation measurement, and pull-out testing were conducted using an Instron Testing Machine. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 23.0), employing ANOVA and non-parametric tests where appropriate.
Results: The Dead Soft wire exhibited the highest pull-out force (92.92 N) and detachment force (51.68 N), while the Multi-Strand Retainer wire showed the lowest pull-out force (58.38 N). The Coaxial wire demonstrated the highest deformation (1.34mm), whereas the Dead Soft wire had the least deformation (0.91mm). Fracture mode analysis revealed significant differences among groups; Coaxial wires predominantly exhibited type 3 fractures (90%), while Dead Soft wires had no type 3 fractures.
Conclusion: The Dead Soft wire outperformed other wire types in terms of pull-out and detachment forces, making it a robust choice for BLRs. However, its lower deformation may reduce flexibility under stress. These findings provide valuable insights for orthodontists in selecting optimal wires for BLR fabrication to enhance clinical outcomes and device longevity.
Keywords
- Annousaki O, Zinelis S, Eliades G, Eliades T. Comparative analysis of the mechanical properties of fiber and stainless steel multistranded wires used for lingual fixed retention. Dent Mater. 2017; 33: e205-e211.
- Rakhshan V. Congenitally missing teeth (hypodontia): A review of the literature concerning the etiology, prevalence, risk factors, patterns and treatment. Dent Res J. 2015; 12: 1-13.
- Kartal Y, Kaya B. Fixed orthodontic retainers: a review. Turkish J Ortho. 2019; 32: 110.
- Kavousinejad S, Nik TH, Shahroudi AS. Comparison of microleakage and shear bond strength of ribbon and twisted wire retainers bonded on human mandibular incisors with two different types of adhesives with and without primer: An in vitro study. Int Ortho. 2022; 20: 100693.
- Alhakim AI, Alhuwaizi AF. Assessment of the Impact of Adhesive and Wires Types on the Tensile Bond Strength of Fixed Lingual Retainers Used in Orthodontics: An In Vitro Study. Dental Hypotheses. 2023; 14: 103-106.
- Goenharto S, Rusdiana E, Khairyyah IN. Comparison between removable and fixed orthodontic retainers. J Vocational Health Studies. 2017; 1: 82-87.
- Quinzi V, Carli E, Mummolo A, De Benedictis F, Salvati SE, Mampieri G. Fixed and removable orthodontic retainers, effects on periodontal health compared: A systematic review. J Oral Bio Craniofaci Res. 2023; 13: 337-346.
- Gökçe B, Kaya B. Periodontal effects and survival rates of different mandibular retainers: comparison of bonding technique and wire thickness. European J Ortho. 2019; 41: 591-600.
- Sifakakis I, Iijima M, Brantley W. Wires used in fixed retainers, debonding and fixed retention in orthodontics: An evidence‐based clinical guide. Available at: https://online-library.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781119623984.ch10
- Meade MJ, Millett DT. Orthodontic bonded retainers: a narrative review. Dental Update. 2020; 47: 421-432.
- Vaida LL, Festila D, Moca AE, Todor BI, Negrutiu B, Mihaiu A, et al. Evaluation of the efficiency of three different types of bonded retainers used in orthodontics. Rev Chim. 2019; 70: 2769-2776.
- Kotha RS, Alla RK, Shammas M, Ravi RK. An overview of orthodontic wires. Trends Biomater Artif Organs. 2014; 28: 32-36.
- Sifakakis I, Eliades T. Laboratory evaluation of orthodontic biomechanics: The clinical applications revisited. Seminars in Orthodontics. 2017; 23: 382-389.
- Sowmya C, Brahmini P, Thimmaiah MK, Thakkar R, Kumar S, Naik MK. Evaluation of Bond Strength and Adhesive Remnant Index of Different Lingual Retainers in Human Incisor Teeth. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024; 16(Suppl 1): S276-S8.
- Bearn DR, McCabe JF, Gordon PH, Aird JC. Bonded orthodontic retainers: the wire-composite interface. American J Ortho Dentofac Orthop. 1997; 111: 67-74.
- Baysal A, Uysal T, Gul N, Alan MB, Ramoglu SI. Comparison of three different orthodontic wires for bonded lingual retainer fabrication. Korean J Ortho. 2012; 42: 39-46.
- Paolone MG, Kaitsas R, Obach P, Kaitsas V, Benedicenti S, Sorrenti E, et al. Tensile test and interface retention forces between wires and composites in lingual fixed retainers. Int Ortho. 2015; 13: 210-220.
- Manfredini M, Ferrario S, Beretta P, Farronato D, Poli PP. Evaluation of breaking force of different suture materials used in dentistry: An in vitro mechanical comparison. Materials. 2022; 15: 1082.
)