V S Bharathi, Kaul Ankur, Tiwari Anurag, Aliya Subhi, Yadav Apna, Bera Trinanjali, Kaur Makkad Preet
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, RajaRajeswari Dental College & Hospital, Bangalore, IND.
Orthodontics, Auburn Dental Group, Auburn, USA.
Cureus. 2024 Sep 18;16(9):e69667. doi: 10.7759/cureus.69667. eCollection 2024 Sep.
Aim Orthodontic treatment relies heavily on the mechanical properties and surface characteristics of archwire materials to achieve optimal outcomes. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the mechanical properties, including tensile strength, yield strength, and modulus of elasticity, as well as the surface characteristics, such as surface roughness and frictional properties, of different archwire materials. Methods Four types of archwire materials, stainless steel, nickel-titanium (NiTi), beta-titanium, and esthetic archwires, were subjected to mechanical testing and surface analysis, with 31 in each group. Tensile testing was conducted to determine the maximum tensile strength, yield strength, and elastic modulus of each material. Surface roughness analysis was performed using profilometry techniques, and frictional properties were evaluated using an orthodontic friction testing apparatus. Results Stainless steel exhibited the highest tensile strength (900 N), followed by beta-titanium (850 N), NiTi (800 N), and esthetic archwire (750 N). Stainless steel also demonstrated the highest yield strength (780 N), followed by beta-titanium (740 N), NiTi (710 N), and esthetic archwire (650 N). The modulus of elasticity was the highest for stainless steel (200 GPa), followed by beta-titanium (170 GPa), NiTi (150 GPa), and esthetic archwires (120 GPa). Surface roughness was lowest in stainless steel archwires (mean Ra value of 0.25 µm), leading to reduced frictional resistance, whereas esthetic archwires exhibited the highest surface roughness (mean Ra value of 0.40 µm) and frictional forces. Significant differences in the mechanical properties and surface characteristics were observed among the materials (p < 0.05). Conclusions The choice of archwire material significantly influences orthodontic treatment outcomes by affecting the efficiency and effectiveness of tooth movement. Stainless steel and beta-titanium wires are ideal for high-stress applications, providing the robust mechanical strength necessary for complex movements. In contrast, NiTi wires, with their superelasticity, offer consistent and gentle forces, enhancing patient comfort and accelerating the alignment phase. Esthetic archwires, while visually appealing, often compromise mechanical performance, potentially prolonging treatment duration.
目的 正畸治疗在很大程度上依赖于弓丝材料的力学性能和表面特性以实现最佳治疗效果。本研究旨在全面评估不同弓丝材料的力学性能,包括拉伸强度、屈服强度和弹性模量,以及表面特性,如表面粗糙度和摩擦性能。方法 对四种弓丝材料,即不锈钢、镍钛(NiTi)、β钛和美观弓丝进行力学测试和表面分析,每组31个样本。进行拉伸试验以确定每种材料的最大拉伸强度、屈服强度和弹性模量。使用轮廓测量技术进行表面粗糙度分析,并使用正畸摩擦测试装置评估摩擦性能。结果 不锈钢的拉伸强度最高(900 N),其次是β钛(850 N)、NiTi(800 N)和美观弓丝(750 N)。不锈钢的屈服强度也最高(780 N),其次是β钛(740 N)、NiTi(710 N)和美观弓丝(650 N)。弹性模量不锈钢最高(200 GPa),其次是β钛(170 GPa)、NiTi(150 GPa)和美观弓丝(120 GPa)。不锈钢弓丝的表面粗糙度最低(平均Ra值为0.25 µm),导致摩擦阻力降低,而美观弓丝的表面粗糙度最高(平均Ra值为0.40 µm)且摩擦力最大。材料之间在力学性能和表面特性方面存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。结论 弓丝材料的选择通过影响牙齿移动的效率和效果,对正畸治疗结果有显著影响。不锈钢丝和β钛丝适用于高应力应用,为复杂移动提供所需的强大机械强度。相比之下,NiTi丝具有超弹性,能提供持续且柔和的力,提高患者舒适度并加速排齐阶段。美观弓丝虽然外观吸引人,但往往会牺牲力学性能,可能会延长治疗时间。