The Impact of Non-Extraction Orthodontic Treatment on the Oral-Health-Related Quality of Life between a Modified Aligner Appliance with Ni-Ti Springs and the Traditional Fixed Appliances: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Background and Objectives: To compare the oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) outcomes between patients treated with modified Ni-Ti spring-based alignment appliances or conventional fixed appliances using the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14), as well as the levels of satisfaction with the appliance appearance, treatment progress, and outcomes. Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients (11 males, 25 females) were randomly divided into two groups: either the modified aligner appliance with Ni-Ti springs group (MAA) or the traditional fixed appliances group (FA). The allocation ratio was 1:1, and the randomization process was carried out by an independent investigator not involved in this study. Mild crowding cases were included in this study. The OHRQoL of patients was evaluated using the short-form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) at five time points: before the treatment commencement (T0); 2 weeks (T1), 1 month (T2), and 2 months (T3) after the treatment initiation; and post-treatment (T4). The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the patient satisfaction. Blinding was performed only during the outcomes assessment. Results: This randomized controlled trial had no dropouts, and the demographic characteristics of the groups were comparable. The MAA group experienced significantly greater functional limitations compared with the FA group at all three evaluation time points (T1, T2, and T3), as evidenced by the statistically significant p-values (p = 0.004, p = 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively). The psychological disability in the MAA group was significantly lower than in the FA group at both T2 (p = 0.005) and T3 (p = 0.003). The patient satisfaction with the appliance appearance was significantly higher in the MAA group than in the FA group (p = 0.002). Conclusions: The OHRQoL improved in both the modified aligner appliance with Ni-Ti springs and fixed appliance groups after the treatment. Moreover, the functional limitations during the treatment were less severe in the FA group, while the psychological disability was lower, and the patient satisfaction with the appliance appearance was higher in the MAA group.

Temperature Changes in the Pulp Chamber During Orthodontic Bonding Using a High-Power Light-Emitting Diode Device With Two Different Exposure Times and Intensities: An In-Vitro Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study used a high-power light-emitting diode (LED) device to evaluate the effects of two exposure times and intensities on pulp chamber temperature and cooling time during bracket bonding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty upper premolars were used in the sample in this study. These premolars were split into two main groups based on the exposure time and intensity: the first group employed a traditional curing mode (TCG) for 20 seconds with an intensity of 1200 mw/cm2, whereas the second group had a quick curing mode (QCG) for 3 seconds with an intensity of 2500 mw/cm2. The pulp chamber's temperature variations and cooling times were recorded using a thermal imaging camera. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to find differences between the two-group comparison of the pulp chamber's temperature and cooling time. RESULTS: The two groups had statistically significant differences regarding the temperature increase in the pulp chamber and cooling time (p > 0.001). The mean temperature increase in the traditional curing group was 3.52°C, which is greater than that in the quick curing group (i.e., a mean value of 1.28°C). The mean cooling time in the traditional curing group was 38.83 seconds, which is greater than that in the quick curing group (9.97 seconds). CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the exposure time to 3 seconds and increasing the intensity to 2500 mw/cm2 is considered safer for the pulp chamber during and after the curing process.

A comparison of maxillary canine retraction into healed and recent extraction sites using cone beam computed tomography: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare maxillary canine retraction between healed and recent extraction sites by assessing movement rate, canine dentoalveolar changes, molar rotation, and anchorage loss using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients (16-26 years old) who had bimaxillary protrusion and orthodontic treatment planned with extraction of first premolars were randomly distributed into two groups and treated using a straight wire appliance. In the recent group (RG), the upper first premolars were extracted 2 weeks before the initiation of canine retraction (after tooth alignment). In the healed group (HG), the upper first premolars were extracted before tooth alignment. Movement rate, canine dentoalveolar changes, molar rotation, and anchorage loss were assessed using CBCT. RESULTS: Movement rate, canine alveolar bone dimensions, canine rotation, and rotation and mesial movement of the first molar were not significantly different between groups (P > .05). Canine tipping was greater in RG (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Retracting canines into recent extraction sites compared with healed sites showed greater distal tipping of the canine with no differences in movement rate, canine alveolar bone dimensions, canine rotation, molar rotation, and anchorage loss.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of modified aligner appliance with nickel-titanium springs in treatment of mild crowding of lower incisors: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of modified aligner appliances with nickel-titanium springs (MAAs) in treating mild mandibular crowding and assess the overall alignment treatment duration, alignment improvement percentage, and mandibular incisor proclination. METHODS: This two-armed, parallel-group randomized controlled trial included 36 patients (7 men, 29 women) with mild mandibular incisor crowding according to Little's Irregularity Index. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the MAA group (mean age = 22.56 ± 3.50 years) and the conventional fixed bracket group (control group; mean age = 20.89 ± 2.90 years). The duration of alignment treatment of the lower anterior teeth was calculated. The progress of alignment was evaluated every 2 weeks on the study casts, which were taken at fixed intervals: pretreatment (T0) and 2 (T1), 4 (T2), 6 (T3), and 8 (T4) weeks after beginning the treatment. Change of mandibular incisor proclination was evaluated by measuring and comparing pretreatment and postalignment lateral cephalograms. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of alignment treatment duration (P = 0.097), whereas a significant difference was observed in the alignment improvement percentage at T1 (P = 0.000), T2 (P = 0.001), and T3 (P = 0.022). In addition, the MAA group had a lower change of mandibular incisor proclination than the control group (P = 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical application of MAAs may be effective in lower incisor decrowding, with a reduction in lower incisor inclination compared with conventional fixed brackets. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT04988373).

The effectiveness of the early orthodontic correction of functional unilateral posterior crossbite in the mixed dentition period: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically appraise the available evidence of the effectiveness of early intervention of functional unilateral posterior crossbites (FPXB) between the ages of 6 and 12 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic search in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) was performed between 1st January 1990 and 31st October 2021. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) for CCTs and Cochrane's risk of bias tool for RCTs were applied. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated according to the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Nine studies (6 RCTs and 3 CCTs) were included in this review, and six of them were appropriate for quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis revealed that the quad-helix (QH) was more effective than expansion plates (EP) in increasing the intermolar width (WMD = 1.25; 95% CI 0.75, 1.75; P < 0.001), and decreasing treatment time (WMD = - 3.36; 95% CI - 4.97, - 1.75; P < 0.001). The relapse rate at 5.6 years post-treatment was greater in the QH group than in the EP group (RR = 3.00); however, the difference was statistically insignificant. There was no significant difference between the QH and the EP in other outcome measures. When assessing the rapid maxillary expansion (RME), only one RCT compared the RME with an untreated control group and reported a significant increase in the maxillary intermolar and intercanine width (P < 0.001, P = 0.002, respectively) and a significant decrease in lower midline deviation (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is weak to moderate evidence that the treatment of functional posterior crossbite (FPXB) by the QH increased the maxillary intermolar width and the success rate and decreased the treatment duration compared to the EP. The relapse percentage was greater in the QH group. There is very weak evidence that the mandibular midline correction rate did not differ significantly between the QH and the EP modalities. The RME using the Hyrax appliance corrected the FPXB successfully; however, the strength of evidence in this regard is very low. As the quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate in this review, we confirm the need for more RCTs with different expansion appliances in the early treatment of FPXB.

Evaluation of the acceleration, skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of low-level laser therapy combined with fixed posterior bite blocks in children with skeletal anterior open bite: A three-arm randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in accelerating the early treatment of the skeletal anterior open bite (AOB) and to evaluate the associated skeletal and dentoalveolar changes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial was conducted on 42 patients aged 8-10 years with skeletal AOB. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups: the fixed posterior bite block+low-level laser therapy (FPBB+LLLT) group; the fixed posterior bite block (FPBB) group; and the untreated control group (UCG) in a 1:1:1 allocation ratio. The LLLT dose in the FPBB+LLLT group was applied using 808-nm wavelength Ga-Al-As semiconductor laser device with the energy of 4-joules/point and irradiation time of 16 seconds/point. LLLT was applied in the first visit; then, it was applied on day 3, 7 and 14 of the first month. Afterwards, it was applied every 15 days until the end of the treatment. Lateral cephalometric images were taken at the beginning of the treatment (T0) and at the end of the active phase (T1). The primary outcome measures were the overall time needed to correct the AOB and the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes. RESULTS: The correction of the AOB required significantly less mean time in the FPBB+LLLT group compared to the FPBB group (x̅=7.07, x̅=9.42 months, respectively; P=0.001). The mean upper first molar intrusion in the FPBB+LLLT group was 1.21mm and significantly greater than that of the FPBB group (0.82mm; P=0.018). However, there was a slight mean extrusion of the upper first molar in the UCG (0.32mm). CONCLUSIONS: The overall time needed to correct the AOB was shorter in the FPBB+LLLT group. The LLLT appeared to be effective in accelerating orthodontic tooth movement. FPBB alone or LLLT were effective in the early treatment of anterior open bite (AOB). The two interventional groups produced similar dentoalveolar and skeletal changes; most of which were dentoalveolar in the correction of the anterior open bite.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patients receiving orthodontic treatment: An online questionnaire cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to a major public health issue; most dental clinics were closed and millions of orthodontic patients were unable to complete their treatment. This study aimed to assess the challenges faced by patients receiving orthodontic treatment and their preferred solutions to overcoming these challenges during this pandemic. METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed and sent to patients receiving orthodontic treatment at a public or private clinic. RESULTS: A total of 388 responses were analyzed: mean age 20.4 ± 4 years, 75% (291) female, and 58% (226) received their treatment at a public clinic. Of all participants, 27.3% (106) were still unable to attend their appointments and 69% (244) stated that closing of the clinic was the main reason for missing their appointments. Depending on their type of appliance, the patients faced different problems and chose multiple ways to deal with them. Most participants had fixed appliances, 84% (327), and only 21% (64) of them stated that they had no problem compared with 39% (11) and 36% (8) for removable appliance and clear aligner groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on orthodontic treatments. Almost every orthodontic patient had to stop attending their appointments, which put them in complicated situations and in fear of delayed treatment. Patients from a public clinic and patients with fixed appliances reported more problems than others. More attention should be giving to teleorthodontics; also orthodontists should prepare their patients to deal with some of the problems related to their appliances when possible.