Comparative assessment of clinical performance of esthetic bracket materials.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the alterations in esthetic appearance and slot morphology/integrity of two main types of esthetic brackets caused after clinical use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen ceramic (CR) and 16 plastic (PR) central incisor brackets were obtained from 16 young adult patients at the end of treatment in a prospective randomized manner. As controls, 12 ceramic (CC) and 12 plastic (PC) nonused brackets were also examined. Three representative slot width measurements were obtained through micrometric microscopy. Visual inspection of optical microscopy images, surface electron microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) were also performed.

RESULTS

Intraoral exposure time varied from 5 to 20 months (mean, 12.4; P  =  .73). Two-way analysis of variance revealed significant differences in slot width among the different materials and a significant interaction between the material effect and its status (P < .001). Bonferroni post hoc tests on material × status effect showed significant differences between CC (95% confidence interval [CI]: 434.5, 447.0) vs PC (95% CI: 460.2, 472.8), CC vs CR (95% CI: 453.2, 464.4), and PC vs PR (95% CI: 448.8, 458.9). Interestingly, a significant difference was not detected for CR vs PR. Slot width was correlated with the time under clinical use only for plastic brackets (PR: r  =  -.64, P < .01). Visual inspection of the optical microscopy images did not reveal any major macroscopic morphological disfigurements or significant discolorations. However, a rough and irregular slot wall surface was evident after clinical use (also with SEM), especially in the bottom of the slot.

CONCLUSIONS

Both bracket types presented adequate clinical performance at least for the time period studied and in terms of esthetic appearance and morphologic integrity.