Abstract
Objectives
To clinically compare the effects of broader archwires to standard archwires, using conventional brackets in both cases, on the transverse and incisor changes in maxillary and mandibular arches during leveling and alignment.
Materials and methods
Fifty-two patients presenting with crowding were allocated into two groups; one group received the broad Damon archwires while the other received standard 3M OrthoForm III Ovoid archwires. All participants were treated with conventional brackets using similar archwire sequences (0.014, 0.018, 0.016 × 0.022/0.016 × 0.025, 0.019 × 0.025 NiTi/CuNiTi archwires). Digital casts were obtained from alginate impressions before treatment (T0) and six weeks after inserting 0.019 × 0.025 NiTi archwires (T1). Pretreatment (T0) and post-alignment (T1) lateral cephalograms were obtained for each patient. The primary outcomes were the changes in the transverse arch dimensions and incisor inclination. The secondary outcomes were the horizontal and vertical linear changes in incisor position.
Results
Complete data were collected for 47 patients. There was a significant increase in arch width during treatment within each group, except for upper inter-molar width in 3M group (P = 0.071). Damon wire induced a statistically significant increase in maxillary inter-second premolar width (P = 0.042), and mandibular inter-first premolar (P = 0.043), inter-second premolar (P = 0.008) and inter-molar widths (P = 0.033) compared to 3M group. The increase in incisor proclination and the linear change in incisor position were significant within each group, with less mandibular incisor proclination (P = 0.004) and horizontal advancement (P = 0.038) in the Damon group.
Conclusions
Damon archwires created a comparatively greater increase in the maxillary inter-second premolar width and the mandibular inter-first premolar, inter-second premolar, and inter-molar widths, and less proclination and horizontal advancement in mandibular incisors. The study provides invaluable evidence that using broad archwires with self-ligating brackets is the reason behind any greater expansion observed in this system rather than the unique mechanical and biological features exerted by the self-ligating system.
Clinical relevance
Our results suggest that Damon archwire might be a better alternative compared to the narrower standard archwires that are usually used with conventional brackets, especially in the mandibular arch, in cases where mild to moderate crowding is planned to be resolved with a non-extraction approach. However, as arch expansion in the absence of posterior crossbites raises the question of long-term stability, the reported advantage of the use of wide wires should be interpreted with caution and should be considered in the retention phase, bearing in mind that achieving a good post-treatment occlusion is important for enhancing post-treatment stability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Bernstein L, Edward H, Angle versus Calvin S, Case (1992) Extraction versus nonextraction. Historical revisionism. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 102:464–470
Bernstein L, Edward H (1992) Angle versus Calvin S. Case: extraction versus nonextraction. Historical revisionism. Part II. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 102:546–551
McNamara JA (2002) Early intervention in the transverse dimension: is it worth the effort? Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 121:572–574
Damon D (1998) The rationale, evolution and clinical application of the self-ligating bracket. Clin Orthod Res 1:52–61
Wagner D, Lévy-Benichou H, Lefebvre F, Bolender Y (2020) Are self-ligating brackets more efficient than conventional brackets? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled and split-mouth trials. Orthod Fr 91:303–321
Maizeray R, Wagner D, Lefebvre F, Lévy-Bénichou H, Bolender Y (2021) Is there any difference between conventional, passive and active self-ligating brackets? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int Orthod 19:523–538
Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T (2007) Self-ligating vs conventional brackets in the treatment of mandibular crowding: a prospective clinical trial of treatment duration and dental effects. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 132:208–215
Fleming PS, DiBiase AT, Sarri G, Lee RT (2009) Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 136:340–347
Vajaria R, BeGole E, Kusnoto B, Galang MT, Obrez A (2011) Evaluation of incisor position and dental transverse dimensional changes using the Damon system. Angle Orthod 81:647–652
Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Katsaros C, Eliades T (2011) Comparative assessment of conventional and self-ligating appliances on the effect of mandibular intermolar distance in adolescent nonextraction patients: a single-center randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 140:99–105
Fleming PS, Lee RT, Marinho V, Johal A (2013) Comparison of maxillary arch dimensional changes with passive and active self-ligation and conventional brackets in the permanent dentition: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144:185–193
Atik E, Akarsu-Guven B, Kocadereli I, Ciger S (2016) Evaluation of maxillary arch dimensional and inclination changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets using broad archwires. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 149:830–837
Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG (2009) Statistical power analyses using G* power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41:1149–1160
Alkebsi A, Al-Maaitah E, Al-Shorman H, Alhaija EA (2018) Three-dimensional assessment of the effect of micro-osteoperforations on the rate of tooth movement during canine retraction in adults with class II malocclusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 153:771–785
Macdonald KE, Kapust AJ, Turley PK (1999) Cephalometric changes after the correction of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 116:13–24
Proffit W, Fields H, Sarver D (2013) Contemporary orthodontics, 5th edn. Mosby, St. Louis
Al-Nimri KS, Hazza’a AM, Al-Omari RM (2009) Maxillary incisor proclination effect on the position of point A in Class II division 2 malocclusion. Angle Orthod 79:880–884
Ricketts RM (1972) A principle of racial growth of the mandible. Angle Orthod 42:368–386
Björk A, Skieller V (1983) Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 5:1–46
Fleiss JL (1986) Analysis of data from multiclinic trials. Control Clin Trials 7:267–275
Dahlberg G Statistical methods for medical and biological students. Statistical methods for medical and biological students 1940
Sofar MK, Rafeeq RA (2021) Evaluation of mechanical properties of Niti and CuNiti archwires in as received and after artificial aging. J Res Med Dent Sci 9:73–79
Atik E, AkarsuGuven B, Kocadereli I (2018) Mandibular Dental Arch Changes with active selfligating brackets combined with different archwires. Niger J Clin Pract 21:566–572
Nogueira ACA, Freitas KMS, de Lima DV, Valarelli FP, Cançado RH (2018) Comparison of changes in incisors position in cases treated with Damon Self-Ligating and Conventional fixed Appliances. Open Dent J 12:275
Housley JA, Nanda RS, Currier GF, McCune DE (2003) Stability of transverse expansion in the mandibular arch. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 124:288–293
Brunetto M, Andriani JD, Ribeiro GL, Locks A, Correa M, Correa LR (2013) Three-dimensional assessment of buccal alveolar bone after rapid and slow maxillary expansion: a clinical trial study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 143:633–44
Garib DG, Henriques JF, Janson G, de Freitas MR, Fernandes AY (2006) Periodontal effects of rapid maxillary expansion with tooth-tissue-borne and tooth-borne expanders: a computed tomography evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 129:749–58
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
This research was funded by the Deanship of Research, Jordan University of Science and Technology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.S.A.: contributed to the research design and methodology, recruited the patients, applied the intervention, performed the data analysis, contributed to the data interpretation, wrote the first draft, and contributed to the revision and editing of the manuscript.K.S.A.: contributed to the research design and methodology, supervision, data interpretation, and revision and editing of the manuscript. W.S.A.: contributed to the interpretation of the results, critically revised the manuscript, and contributed to the revision and editing of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) Committee at King Abdullah University Hospital, Jordanian University of Science and Technology (JUST) in Irbid, Jordan (Ref # 271202019). Informed written consent was obtained from all participants in the study.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Ahmed, A.S., Al-Nimri, K.S. & Ahmed, W.S. Comparison of transverse dimensional and incisor changes between wide and narrow orthodontic archwires: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Invest 28, 338 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05724-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05724-0