The aim of the present study was to evaluate in a clinical setting the bracket survival of lingual brackets bonded with the KommonBase system, and to compare it to the survival of a customized lingual bracket system. Two convenience samples of 13 consecutive patients treated with lingual fixed appliances with KommonBase extensions (Group 1) and 14 consecutive patients treated with customized Incognito (TM) lingual fixed appliances were retrospectively enrolled (Group 2). First time debondings were recorded from the files. Data were submitted to statistical analysis and a Log-rank test was used to compare the Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the two groups. Statistical significance was set as p < 0.05. Lingual brackets bonded with the KommonBase system showed a failure rate of 8%, while Incognito brackets showed a failure rate of 7.1%. The Log-rank test comparing the Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.343). Most debondings occurred during the first 6 months. Upper incisors and canines were less prone to debond than premolars and molars. In conclusion, no difference in bracket survival was observed between the KommonBase system and a customized lingual appliance.
Bonding Failures of Lingual Orthodontic Brackets: A Retrospective Study Comparing Lingual Brackets with KommonBase Extensions, to Customized Lingual Brackets
Tepedino M.;
2022-01-01
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate in a clinical setting the bracket survival of lingual brackets bonded with the KommonBase system, and to compare it to the survival of a customized lingual bracket system. Two convenience samples of 13 consecutive patients treated with lingual fixed appliances with KommonBase extensions (Group 1) and 14 consecutive patients treated with customized Incognito (TM) lingual fixed appliances were retrospectively enrolled (Group 2). First time debondings were recorded from the files. Data were submitted to statistical analysis and a Log-rank test was used to compare the Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the two groups. Statistical significance was set as p < 0.05. Lingual brackets bonded with the KommonBase system showed a failure rate of 8%, while Incognito brackets showed a failure rate of 7.1%. The Log-rank test comparing the Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.343). Most debondings occurred during the first 6 months. Upper incisors and canines were less prone to debond than premolars and molars. In conclusion, no difference in bracket survival was observed between the KommonBase system and a customized lingual appliance.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
