Surface wear and adhesive failure of resin attachments used in clear aligner orthodontic treatment.

PURPOSE

This study evaluated adhesive and cohesive failures and the surface wear of attachments employed in clear aligner treatment (CAT) using three-dimensional (3D) superimposition.

METHODS

In all, 3D models of 150 teeth were obtained from intraoral scans from patients undergoing CAT with at least 4 months between each scan. Of the initial sample, 25 teeth were discarded, and 125 teeth were included in the study. Superimpositions of each individual tooth at the first and second time points were made using computer-aided design (CAD) software (Meshmixer; Autodesk, Mill Valley, CA, USA). Analyses were performed to compare surface wear and failures related to type of attachment (optimized/conventional), dental group (molars/premolars/anterior teeth), and arch (mandibular/maxillary). Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests were applied with significance set at 5%.

RESULTS

More surface wear was observed in conventional attachments, mandibular and anterior teeth with statistical significance for surface wear on the distal surface of conventional attachments (p < 0.05). Cohesive failure was observed in 10% of attachments, occurring most frequently on optimized attachments and molar teeth. Adhesive failure was observed in 10% of the samples, more frequently on conventional attachments and posterior teeth.

CONCLUSION

Attachment type (conventional vs. optimized) was significantly correlated with surface wear on the distal surface of the attachment. Arch (mandibular or maxillary) and group of teeth (anterior or posterior) showed no correlation with surface wear. Failure, both adhesive and cohesive, correlated with attachment type and group of teeth, but not with the arch in which they were located.