Abstract Coated archwires and ceramic brackets have been developed to improve facial esthetics during orthodontic treatment. However, their mechanical behavior has been shown to be different from metallic archwires and brackets. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the deflection forces in coated nickel-titanium (NiTi) and esthetic archwires combined with ceramic brackets. Material and Methods Non-coated NiTi (NC), rhodium coated NiTi (RC), teflon coated NiTi (TC), epoxy coated NiTi (EC), fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP), and the three different conventional brackets metal-insert polycrystalline ceramic (MI-PC), polycrystalline ceramic (PC) and monocrystalline ceramic (MC) were used. The specimens were set up on a clinical simulation device and evaluated in a Universal Testing Machine (Instron). An acrylic device, representative of the right maxillary central incisor was buccolingually activated and the unloading forces generated were recorded at 3, 2, 1 and 0.5 mm. The speed of the testing machine was 2 mm/min. ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to compare the different archwires and brackets. Results The brackets presented the following decreasing force ranking: monocrystalline, polycrystalline and polycrystalline metal-insert. The decreasing force ranking of the archwires was: rhodium coated NiTi (RC), non-coated NiTi (NC), teflon coated NiTi (TC), epoxy coated NiTi (EC) and fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP). At 3 mm of unloading the FRP archwire had a plastic deformation and produced an extremely low force in 2; 1 and 0.5 mm of unloading. Conclusion Combinations of the evaluated archwires and brackets will produce a force ranking proportional to the combination of their individual force rankings.

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate deflection forces of orthodontic wires of different alloys engaged into conventional brackets using several ligation types. Stainless steel, conventional superelastic nickel-titanium and thermally activated nickel-titanium archwires tied into conventional brackets by a ring-shaped elastomeric ligature (RSEL), a 8-shaped elastomeric ligature (8SEL) and a metal ligature (ML) were tested. A clinical simulation device was created especially for this study and forces were measured with an Instron Universal Testing Machine. For the testing procedure, the block representing the maxillary right central incisor was moved 0.5 and 1 mm bucco-lingually at a constant speed of 2 mm/min, and the forces released by the wires were recorded, in accordance with the ISO 15841 guidelines. In general, the RSEL showed lighter forces, while 8SEL and ML showed higher values. At the 0.5 mm deflection, the 8SEL presented the greatest force, but at the 1.0 mm deflection the ML had a statistically similar force. Based on our evaluations, to obtain lighter forces, the thermally activated nickel-titanium wire with the RSEL are recommended, while the steel wire with the 8SEL or the ML are recommended when larger forces are desired. The ML exhibited the highest force increase with increased deflections, compared with the elastomeric ligatures.

RESUMO Objetivo: o objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar as forças de deflexão de fios ortodônticos retangulares em braquetes convencionais (MorelliTM) e autoligáveis ativos (In-Ovation RTM ) e passivos (Damon 3MXTM). Material e Métodos: foram utilizadas duas marcas comerciais (MorelliTM e GACTM) de fios de aço inoxidável e de níquel-titânio (NiTi), além do fio de NiTi com adição de cobre (OrmcoTM). Os espécimes foram montados em um dispositivo de simulação clínica especialmente desenhado para esse estudo e testado em uma máquina universal de ensaios Instron. Para o procedimento dos testes, a peça representativa do incisivo central superior direito foi movida no sentido vestibulolingual em ativações de 0 a 1 mm, com leituras da força liberada pela deflexão em 0,5; 0,8 e 1 mm, em uma velocidade constante de 2 mm/min. As forças interbraquetes com os fios de aço, de NiTi e NiTi com adição de cobre foram individualmente comparadas pelo teste de ANOVA a dois critérios, seguido pelo teste de Tukey. Resultados: houve menor liberação de forças nos braquetes convencionais, seguidos pelos braquetes autoligáveis ativos e passivos. Entre as marcas comerciais, somente houve diferença para o fio de NiTi, onde a marca MorelliTM apresentou maiores forças do que a GACTM. Conclusão: os braquetes promovem diferentes graus de forças de deflexão, sendo que os braquetes autoligáveis liberam as maiores forças.

ABSTRACT Introduction: The aim of the study was to evaluate deflection forces of rectangular orthodontic wires in conventional (MorelliTM), active (In-Ovation RTM) and passive (Damon 3MXTM) self-ligating brackets. Material and Methods: Two brands of stainless steel and nickel-titanium (NiTi) wires (MorelliTM and GACTM), in addition to OrmcoTM copper-nickel-titanium wires were used. Specimens were assembled in a clinical simulation device especially designed for this study and tested in an Instron universal testing machine. For the testing procedures, an acrylic structure representative of the maxillary right central incisor was lingually moved in activations of 0 to 1 mm, with readings of the force released by deflection in unloading of 0.5, 0.8 and 1 mm at a constant speed of 2 mm/min. Inter-bracket forces with stainless steel, NiTi and CuNiTi were individually compared by two-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s tests. Results: Results showed that there were lower forces in conventional brackets, followed by active and passive self-ligating brackets. Within the brands, only for NiTi wires, the MorelliTM brand presented higher forces than GACTM wires. Conclusions: Bracket systems provide different degrees of deflection force, with self-ligating brackets showing the highest forces.