Rotational Control and Retraction of Maxillary Canine Using Self-Ligating Empower Brackets: An Study.

INTRODUCTION

Interest in self-ligating brackets is generally smoother and more comfortable.

OBJECTIVES

To compare rate of retraction and rotational control of maxillary canines with self-ligating MBT brackets on one side and conventional MBT brackets on the other side of the maxillary arch.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten subjects with a mean age range of 18 to 25 years were selected. For each patient in the maxillary arch, bonding was performed with 0.022-inch slot conventional MBT brackets on one side and 0.022-inch slot self-ligating MBT brackets on the other side. Stainless steel 0.009-inch ligatures are used for conventional ligation. Retraction of canines was performed with 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel wires using NiTi closed coil springs with eyelets of 12 mm and 9 mm. The force of retraction was measured using a dynamometer. Dental casts were made at each time interval to record the canine retraction rate (in mm) and rotation (in degrees).

RESULTS

The mean difference in the retraction rate was 0.045 mm/month between self-ligating and conventional brackets, respectively ( > 0.05). The mean difference of total rotation of canines with self-ligating and conventional brackets was 1.5°, which gives evidence that there was less rotation of canines with self-ligating brackets.

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant difference in canine retraction rates between conventional and self-ligating brackets. Secure ligation with the self-ligating brackets showed better rotational control than the conventional brackets.