Brackets part 1/endodontic courses

BRACKETS
PART 1
www.indiandentalacademy.com

CONTENTS
 Introduction
 Evolution of brackets
 Ribbon Arch bracket
 Edgewise brackets
 Twin Brackets
 Curved base twin
brackets
 Labio
LingualAppliance
 Modified Ribbon Arch
Brackets (Begg)
 Brackets used in
 Parts of bracket
 Materials used in
Orthodontic brackets
 Gold
 Stainless steel
 Plastic
 Composite
 Ceramic
 Cobalt chromium
alloy
 Titanium
 Zirconia

 Bracket width and size
 Bracket and Type of
rotation control wings
 Lang brackets
 Lewis bracket and its
modifications
 Steiner bracket
 Broussard bracket

 Mode of ligation
 Conventional
method
 Self ligating
brackets
 Edgelok
 Mobilok
 Activa
 SPEED


 Brackets systems and Philosophy
 Straight wire brackets
 ROTH brackets
 Ricketts Bioprogressive brackets
 MBT brackets
 Tip edge brackets
 Lingual brackets
 Conclusion
 References

INTRODUCTION
 In Orthodontics all the devices which projects
horizontally to support the archwire and are
open on one end usually vertical or horizontal
plane are called brackets.
 Raymond C. Thurow has defined bracket as
an orthodontic attachment secured to a tooth
for the purpose of engaging on arch wire

RIBBON ARCH APPLIANCE BY
ANGLE (1916)1,2,3

Pin and tube-1910

Edgewise brackets.2,13
 "latest and best orthodontic mechanism,"
(Dental Cosmos) which he introduced in 1925
"open face" or "tie brackets."
22x28 mils

Repeated tying was necessary to rotate the
tooth to its final position. Tying was continued
throughout the treatment plan to prevent any
relapse.

Twin Brackets(Dual, double or
Siamese brackets)13

Twin Brackets
Extra wide

Curved Base Twin Bracket

Labio Lingual Appliance2
 John Mershon developed this system in 1926

Universal appliance brackets 2
Spencer Atkinson in 1935

Twin wire brackets2
Joseph Johnson 1934

Modified Ribbon Arch Brackets
(Begg)2,13
 1928, P. R. Begg of Adelaide, South Australia,
a former student at the Angle School of
Orthodontia
 Observed that many of the patients he had
treated with expansion using edgewise
appliance experienced collapse of their
occlusions at the end of retention and/or had
unacceptable soft-tissue profiles
 Begg’s appliance developed by Dr P.R.Begg
1956

Begg’s adaptation took 3 forms
 Replacement of precious metal ribbon arch
with high strength 16 mil SS wire which
became available in 1930s
 Retained the original bracket but turned it
upside down.
 Added auxiliary springs for control of root
positions.

PARTS OF BRACKETS

Base of the bracket
 Welding tab ,solder or a bonding mesh
 Curved to conform tooth structure
 Mode of retention of bracket bases may be:
 Mechanical retention
 Micromechanical retention
 Chemical adhesion
 Mechanical and chemical retention

Bracket base types
 Mesh type
 The sizes of the wire mesh used in the
manufacturing of the various single mesh type
bases were 40, 60, 80, and 100 meshes
(Dickinson 1980).
 Non mesh type

PARTS OF A DIRECT-BONDING METAL BRACKET12

MESH TYPE BASES
FOIL MESH BASE
(DENTAURUM)
DYNA BOND MESH BASE
(3M UNITEK)
SUPER MESH BASE (GAC)ORMESH BASE (100 gauge foil mesh)
(ORMCO)

 Nominal area of bracket base is measured by
a method called Planimetry where enlarged
photographs of bracket base are examined
and mesh size is also calculated by counting
wires per linear inch (Dickinson 1980).

NON-MESH TYPE BASES
MICRO-LOC BASES
(GAC)
MICRO ETCH BASE
(3M UNITEK)
DYNA-LOCK INTEGRAL BASE
3M UNITEK
LASER STRUCTURED BASE
(DENTAURUM)

STAINLESS STEEL BRACKETS
WITH DIFFERENT BASE TYPES
 James Lopez (1980) studied retentive shear strength
of sixteen commercially available stainless steel
bracket bases.
 The solid bases with perforations around the periphery
had lowest mean shear strengths and are probably due
to the lack of mechanical retention in the center of the
base.
 The solid base with perforations throughout the base
slightly increased the mean shear strength values.
 Solid base with circular indents that serve for retention
was generally ranked in the intermediate bond strengths.
 The foil mesh designs proved to range from the most
inferior to the most superior shear strengths.
 Smaller foil mesh bases could be used without sacrificing

CLASSIFICATION OF
BRACKETS
 Brackets can be grouped into various types
based on :
 Bracket material
 Their width and size
 Type of rotation control wings
 Mode of ligation (ligation capabilities)

Materials used in Orthodontic
brackets
 GOLD BRACKETS
 The original brackets as designed by Angle
were made of gold.

Gold alloys
 Gold at least 75%
 Platinum, iridium and silver alloys
 Lacked flexibility and tensile strength.
German silver (a brass)
 Copper 65 %, Nickel 14 %, and zinc 21%
 1887 Angle
 J.N.Farrar condemned the use of the new alloy,
showing that it discolored in the mouth

STAINLESS STEEL
BRACKETS
 Stainless steel entered dentistry in 1919
introduced at Krupp’s Dental Polyclinic in
Germany by the company’s dentist F Hauptmeyer.
He first used it to make a prosthesis and called it
WIPLA ( like platinum in German), the designation
which is still used in Europe.12
 Brackets made of stainless steel are alloys
formulated according to the American Iron and
Steel Institute (AISI)

Composition
303
304 L
316 L
SAF 2205 has 22% Cr, 5.5% Ni, 3% Mn, and 0.03% C
The 2205 stainless steel alloy has a duplex microstructure
consisting of austenitic and delta-ferritic phases and is harder
and demonstrated less crevice corrosion than 316L alloy.
(Oshida & Moore)

 Excess of carbon + Cr depleted Austenitic
phase
 Film of chromium carbide interferes with
grain coherence and leads to intergranular
corrosion.

Other additives are,
Silicon (Si)  if kept at lower concentration, improves
resistance to oxidation at & to corrosion
Sulfur (S)  sulfur content allows easy machining of
wrought parts
Phosphorus (P)  allows use of a lower temperature for
sintering
Manganese (Mn)  used as a replacement for nickel to
stabilize austenite

CLASSIFICATION OF STAINLESS STEELS
Stainless steels are classified according to the American Iron and Steel
Institute (AISI) system.
1) Austenitic steels (300 series)
2) Martensitic steels (400 series)
3) Ferritic steels
4) Duplex steels
5) Precipitation-hardenable (PH) steels
6) Cobalt containing alloys
7) Manganese containing steels

MANUFACTURING METHODS FOR
METAL BRACKETS5
 From thin metal strip that is stamped to shape
 Milling one-piece attachment is milled on the lathe
 Casting where one-piece brackets are made by casting
 Sintering the partial welding together of metal particles
below their melting point
 Metal injection molding (MIM) This technique requires the
use of computer-aided design, along with computer-
numerical controlled machines tools.

PLASTIC BRACKETS
 Morton Cohen and Silverman introduced
the first commercially available plastic
brackets (IPB brackets), manufactured by
GAC in 1963.
 They are made of acrylics, nylons, expoxy
polysulfones, polycarbonates.

Advantages:
 Clarity
 Heat resistance
 Less irritation to soft tissues
 Resilient
 Flexibility
 no odor or bad taste (Newman, 1969)
 Non toxic

Disadvantages
 Staining and discoloration, (particularly in
patients who smoke or drink coffee)
 Poor dimensional stability (lack strength to resist
distortion and breakage)
 Wire slot wear (which leads to loss of tooth
control)
 Undue friction between the surface of the plastic
bracket and metal arch wires that makes it very
difficult to slide teeth into a new position.
 Uptake of water (Newman 1973).

 Various reinforced polycarbonate brackets were,
1) Fiberglass reinforced polycarbonate brackets
2) Ceramic reinforced polycarbonate brackets
3) Metal slot reinforced polycarbonate brackets
4) Metal slot and ceramic reinforced polycarbonate brackets
(composite brackets)

PLASTIC WITH STAINLESS STEEL
BRACKETS
Available in .018 x .022, .022 x .028 slots by
Dentaurum
Advantages
 Have unbreakable and distortion free slot
 Wide tie wings for easy ligation
 Rounded edges for patient comfort
 Rough surface of bracket pad to facilitate retention of
bonding adhesive
 Suitable for all bonding systems
But added bulk is required to provide adequate strength of
the tie wings www.indiandentalacademy.com

 Commercially available :
 Extra wide for maxillary incisors
 Medium width for maxillary laterals
 Narrow width for mandibular centrals and
laterals
 Medium width for all canines and bicuspids

POLYCARBONATES WITH FIBERGLASS
REINFORCED BRACKETS
 Currently available include (American
orthodontics) as the name SILKON and
SILKOMAN
 Available in .018 x .022, .022 x .028 slots
 Poor dimensional stability and reduced
resistance to fracture. (Newman 1969)

PLASTIC WITH CERAMIC
BRACKETS5
 Advantages:
 Enhanced strength without steel
 Esthetic
 Super smooth surface
 Mechanical lock base
 Available in .018 and .022 slot sizes in Roth
prescription, Standard Edgewise appliance.
VogueTM (GAC)

Composite brackets12

Spirit®MB (ORMCO Classic (American Orthodontics)

Ceramic brackets
 Ceramic orthodontic brackets were
introduced in late 1980s
 Ceramics used for the manufacturing of
ceramic brackets were Alumina and
Zirconia
Various ceramic brackets
available
on the market

 Four different types of ceramic brackets currently available are
Material Manufacturer, name
Polycrystalline alumina American, dentarum, rockey mountain,
unitek, transund and many others.
Poly crystalline alumina with
metal slot
Unitek, clarity.
Monocrystalline alumina A co, starfire.
Polycrystalline zirconia Yumaura, toray.

INTERATOMIC BONDING OF
CERAMICS
combination of covalent
and ionic bonding
 This strong interatomic bonding accounts
for the advantageous chemical inertness
of dental ceramics.
Al3+ Al3+
Al3+
Al3+
Al3+ Al3+
O2-
O2-
O2-
O2-
O2-
O2-
b2"
b1
b'
b"
3
2
1

MANUFACTURING METHODS FOR
CERAMIC BRACKETS
MONOCRYSTALLINE
(SAPPHIRE)
BRACKETS
molten
high-
purity
aluminiu
m oxide
temperat
ures
above
2100C
slow
coolin
g
bulk single
crystal alumina
rod or bar form
milled into
brackets using
diamond
cutting,lasers,
or ultrasonic
cutting.
subsequently heat
treated to remove
surface
imperfections and
stresses created
by the milling
process.

POLYCRYSTALLINE ALUMINA
BRACKETS
aluminium oxide
particles + binder
1800C to burn
out the binder and
achieve sintering
of the particles
milled into
brackets using
diamond
cutting,lasers, or
ultrasonic cutting.
subsequently heat
treated to remove
surface
imperfections and
stresses created
by the milling
process.

MXi (TP ORTHODONTICS)
POLYCRYSTALLINE ALUMINA CERAMIC BRACKETS
MONOCRYSTALLINE CERAMIC BRACKET
Inspire Starfire

POLYCRYSTALLINE ALUMINA CERAMIC BRACKETS
Allure (GAC)
CLARITY (3M UNITEK)
Micro-crystalline bonding surface
20/40
(American Orthodontics)

Bonding of ceramic brackets
 Ceramic brackets bond to enamel by
different methods.
 Mechanical retention via indentations and / or
under cuts in the base.
 Chemical bonding by means of silane coupling
agents. (both chemically and light cured
adhesives are available).
 Micromechanical retention through the utilization
of a number of configurations, including
protruding crystals, grooves, a porous surface,
and spherical glass particles.

 The coupling agent:
 -methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane (-
MPTS) has been used for promoting chemical
adhesion between surfaces.

Advantages
 The optical esthetic properties of ceramics provide
the only main advantage over stainless steel
brackets
 A very important physical property of ceramic
brackets is the extremely high hardness of
aluminium oxide, so that both monocrystalline and
polycrystalline alumina have a significant
advantage over stainless steel (Birnie 1990).
 Swartz (1988) stated that ceramic brackets are
nine times harder than stainless steel brackets and
enamel

 Reported bond strengths for ceramic
brackets are in the range of 123 to 288
kg/cm2 compared with 50 to 170 kg/cm2
for stainless steel brackets

Drawbacks of ceramic brackets
1. The frictional resistance between orthodontic
wire and ceramic brackets is greater and less
predictable than it is with steel brackets.
 This makes determining optimal force levels
and anchorage control difficult.

 Pratten, Popli & Germane (1990) studied
frictional resistance between ceramic and
stainless steel brackets using Nitinol and
stainless steel wires.
 Ceramic brackets provide significantly greater
frictional resistance than stainless steel
brackets when they are used in combination
with either stainless steel or nitinol arch wires.
 Under all conditions, the stainless steel
brackets had lower coefficients of friction than
the ceramic brackets.

 Omana and Moore (1992) compared static
frictional properties of metal and ceramic
brackets and concluded that,
 Smoother, injection-molded ceramic brackets
appear to create less friction than other
ceramic brackets.
 Wider metal or ceramic brackets create less
friction than narrower brackets of the same
material.

CERAMIC BRACKETS WITH METAL SLOTS
VIRAGE
(American Orthodontics)
CLARITY (3M UNITEK)

2. The surface is rougher or more porous than
that of steel brackets and hence can lead to
oral hygiene problems.
3. The added bulk required to provide adequate
strength makes oral hygiene still more difficult

4. They are less durable and are brittle in nature.
 The limiting physical property of ceramic
brackets is fracture toughness.
 An alumina ceramic bracket has a fracture
toughness of 3.0 to 5.3 Mpa
 Stainless steel bracket has a fracture toughness
of 80 to 90 MPa

5. They can induce wearing of enamel of
opposing tooth
6. Difficult to debond than steel brackets
and wing fracture may easily occur during
debracketing

A Example of fracture of the Starfire bracket.
B Example of fracture of the Allure bracket.
C Example of fracture of the Transcend bracket.
Bishara and Trulove1990 AJO-DO

bond failure at the bracket-adhesive interface
bond failure at the enamel-
adhesive interface
combination bond failure.
Part of the adhesive
remains on the tooth
surface and part is
removed with the bracket.www.indiandentalacademy.com

TIE-WING STRENGTH
 Photoelastic studies and finite-element
analyses have shown that tie-wings are
generally the locations of concentrated
stresses when forces are applied to the
ceramic brackets.
 Tie-wing fractures have been much more
common for the single-crystal alumina
brackets because of their lower resistance to
crack propagation.

Clinical precautions when using
mechanical debonding
techniques11
The blades of the pliers should be
placed at the enamel-bracket
interface to

Electrothermic debracketing (ETD)
 Sheridan, Brawley and Hastings (1986)
introduced an alternative to conventional
bracket removal. The technique is called
Electrothermic debrackAJeting (ETD).
ETD is the technique of removing bonded
brackets from enamel surfaces with a
cordless battery device that generates
heat.

 Dentaurum thermodebonding unit inserted into
bracket slot.

 Scheu-Dental ceramic thermodebonding plier with
ceramic bracket inserted.

The disadvantages of
electrothermal bonding :
 A potential for pulpal damage that still needs to
be definitively assessed.
 An increase in the temperature of the cone
part of the handpiece, which has the potential
to cause patient discomfort or mucosal
irritation if carelessly used.
 The still-bulky handpiece design, which makes
its intraoral use difficult in the premolar region.

CO-CR ALLOY BRACKETS 5
 Increased surface
hardness
 Cast surface is
smoother than
machined surface
providing lower friction
forces between wire
and bracket.
 It also undergoes less
corrosion as compared
to stainless steel.

TITANIUM BRACKETS 8,5
• Pure titanium bracket
(DENTAURUM) in 1995.
• Its one-piece construction
requires no brazing layer, and
thus it is a solder- and nickel-free
bracket.
• Titanium brackets were grayer in
color and rougher in texture than
the stainless steel brackets
• Imparts none of the metallic
taste as seen in stainless
steel brackets
• Titanium also has low
thermal conductivity

Composition
 The chemical composition is 99+% Ti
 less than 0.30% iron
 0.35% oxygen
 0.35% nitrogen
 0.05% carbon
 0.06% hydrogen.
 The marking and the structuring of the retentive
base pads were done by a computer-aided laser
(CAL) cutting process, which generates micro-
and macro-undercuts.

Role of TiO2
 Inhibits adsorption or absorption of foreign
metal ions or additional oxygen atoms.
 Its passivity over a broad pH range
 No corrosion
 Ti exhibits the minimum tissue response of all
commonly used metals.

ZIRCONIA BRACKETS9
 Researchers have suggested that brackets
constructed from zirconia have low friction in
clinical use. (Springate 1991).
 Low frictional coefficients, good wear resistance,
high fracture toughness, and biocompatibility
[Keith, Kusy, and Whitley(1994 AJO DO)]
 Commercially available as:
 Harmony – Hudson ltd. Sheffield U.K.
 Toray – Yamura corp. Tokyo Japan

BRACKETS PART II
By Dr. Neha Chowdhry

 Bracket and Type of
rotation control wings
 Lang brackets
 Lewis bracket and its
modifications
 Steiner bracket
 Broussard bracket

 Mode of ligation
 Conventional
method
 Self ligating
brackets
 Edgelok
 Mobilok
 Activa
 SPEED

 Brackets systems
 Straight wire brackets
 ROTH brackets
 MBT brackets
 Tip edge brackets
 Lingual brackets
 Conclusion
 References

BASED ON ROTATION CONTROL
WINGS2,13
 Disadvantages:
 Inter bracket distance is
decreased.
 Resiliency in the arch wire is
decreased.
 Difficulty in employing closing
loop arch wires and second
order bends.
 Interferes with the amount of
closing action that can be
obtained by activating closing
loops. But the narrower
bracket allowed more
activation of these arch wires.

Lang bracket
 Dr. Howard Lang
 The single bracket
allows for easy ligation
and increased
interbracket width
 The wing can easily be
activated for rotational
control.

Advantages
1. 100% desired tooth rotation .
2. Overcorrection
3. They do not interfere with activation of
closing loops.
4. Second order bends and other archwire
bends slide freely past the rotation wings

Lewis bracket by Dr. Paul D Lewis,
(1950)

Curved Lewis bracket

Vertical slot lewis bracket
 further refinement was done
by incorporating a .020
x.020 vertical slot
 Advantage-
uprighting spring to correct
axial inclination.

Steiner bracket by Cecil Steiner

PREADJUSTED EDGEWISE
BRACKETS
Andrew’s Straight Wire Appliance (SWA)

 The original SWA was introduced by
Andrews in 1972
 He recommended a wide range of
brackets.
- For extraction cases, anti-tip,anti-rotation,
and power arms for control space
closure.
-Three sets of incisor brackets with varying
degrees of torque for different clinical
situation. www.indiandentalacademy.com

Maxilla

Mandible

Roth Bracket system

 To avoid inventory difficulties or multiple
bracket system, ROTH recommended a single
appliance system to manage both extraction
and non-extraction cases.

Purpose of the ‘Roth setup’
 To provide idealized tooth position prior to
appliance removal
 Allow the teeth to settle to Andrews non
Orthodontic normals

Overcorrection
Single prescription
with overcorrection in
all planes of space
"Six Keys to Normal
Occlusion"

Bracket type
 0.018 and 0.022 slot brackets available
 0.018 – too restrictive in wire size selection
 0.022 slot preferred – in terms of :
 Wire size selection
 Stabilizing arches as anchor units
 Control of torque in buccal segment

Single wing bracket with rotation
arms versus twin bracket

Bracket height

Upper 1’s 2’s 3’s 4’s 5’s 6’s 7’s
Tip 50 90 130 00 00 00 00
Andrews 5 9 11 2 2 5 5
Lower 1’s 2’s 3’s 4’s 5’s 6’s 7’s
Tip 20 20 70 -10 -10 -10 -10
Andrews 2 2 5 2 2 2 2
Tip

Upper 1’s 2’s 3’s 4’s 5’s 6’s 7’s
Torque 120 80 -20 -70 -70 -140 -140
Andrews 7 30 -7 -70 -70 -9 -90
Lower 1’s 2’s 3’s 4’s 5’s 6’s 7’s
Torque -10 -10 -110 -170 -220 -300 -300
Andrews -10 -10 -110 -170 -220 -300 -300

Upper torque
considerations
There was a tendency for upper
first molar palatal cusps to
extrude.
A bracket with – 140 of buccal
torque gives extra control.

Wick Alexander 1983
The Vari Simplex Discipline

VARI SIMPLEX DISCIPLINE
Bracket
selection
Bracket
height
Bracket
angulation
Bracket
torque
Bracket
in-out.

Bracket selection
Twin brackets (Diamond brackets)www.indiandentalacademy.com

Lang Bracket

Lewis Bracket

Twin brackets with convertible
sheath

Bracket height
Maxillary Arch
 Centrals X
 Laterals X – 0.5mm
 Cuspids X + 0.5mm
 Bicuspids X
 1st MolarsX – 0.5mm
 2nd Molars X – 1.0mm
 Mandibular Arch
 Centrals X – 0.5mm
 Laterals X – 0.5mm
 Cuspids X + 0.5mm
 Bicuspids X
 1st MolarsX – 0.5mmwww.indiandentalacademy.com

Bracket tip
Andrews 20

Vari simplex bracket torques
Andrews -7
-1

Bracket in/out

The MBT system

Bracket type
 Range of brackets
- Standard size metal brackets.
- Mid-size metal brackets.
-Esthetic brackets.
 Improved i.d system
Laser numbering of standard size metal
brackets.
 Rhomboidal shape
Reduces bulk and assists accuracy of bracket
placement.

 Drawing of original
SWA bracket.
 Dots (upper) and
dashes (lower) were
used for i.d
purposes.

 Drawing of MBT
brackets.
 Standard size
brackets have a
rhomboidal form
and numerical
i.d.system.

 Lower premolar
bracket may be
offset on specially
designed bases,to
increase bond
strength and reduce
the risk of bond
failure.

 Tapered bracket
bases on lower
incisors can
help in plaque
control in this
difficult area.

The MBT prescription
Disadvantages of additional anterior tip
 Significant drain on A/P anchorage.
 Increased the tendency to bite deepening
during alignment stage.
 Brought upper canine root apex too close to
the first premolar root in some cases.

TIP SPECIFICATION
ANTERIOR TIP
Reduced anterior tip was incorporated into
the appliance to conform to Andrews original
research, and to dramatically reduce the
anchorage needs of each case.

Incisor Tip Cuspid Tip
Upper
Central
Upper
Lateral
Lower
Central
Lower
Lateral
Upper Lower
MBT
Versatile+
4.0 8.0 0 0 8.0 3.0
Original
SWA3
5.0 9.0 2.0 2.0 11.0 5.0

Bicuspid Tip Molar Tip
Upper First Upper
Second
Upper First Upper
Second
MBT Versatile+ 0 0 0 0
Original SWA 2.0 2.0 5.0 5.0

Lower Bicuspid Tip Lower Molar Tip
Lower First Lower
Second
Lower First Lower
Second
MBT Versatile+ 2.0 2.0 0 0
Original SWA 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

TORQUE SPECIFICATION
INCISOR TORQUE
•Upper incisor brackets are provided with additional
palatal root torque; while lower incisor brackets are
provided with additional labial root torque.
•This adjustment aids in the correction of the most
common torque problems occurring in the incisor
areas.

Upper central incisor torque
 Increased
palatal root
torque for upper
centrals.

Upper lateral incisor torque
 Increased
palatal root
torque for
upper lateral
incisors.

Lower incisor torque
 Increased
labial root
torque for
lower
incisors.

Incisor Torque Incisor Torque
Upper
Central
Upper
Lateral
Lower
Central
Lower
Lateral
MBT Versatile+ 17.0 10.0 -6.0 -6.0
Original SWA 7.0 3.0 -1.0 -1.0

UPPER CUSPID ,BICUSPID
AND MOLAR TORQUE.
•Upper cuspid and bicuspid brackets are provided
with the normal -70 of torque.
•Upper molar brackets are provided with an additional
50 of buccal root torque (-90 to -140 ) to reduce palatal
cusp interferences with these teeth.

 Upper canine torque.
 Available in –70 ,00 ,
+70 , torque.
 The 00 and +70
options are for cases
with narrow maxillary
bone form andor
prominent canine
roots,and are often
used with archwires in
the tapered form.

Upper Cuspid, Bicuspid and Molar Torque
Upper
Cuspids
Upper 1st
Bicuspid
s
Upper 2nd
Bicuspids
Upper 1st
Molars
Upper 2nd
Molars
MBT
Versatile+
-7.0 -7.0 -7.0 -14.0 -14.0
Original
SWA
-7.0 -7.0 -7.0 -9.0 -9.0

LOWER CUSPID,BICUSPID
AND MOLAR TORQUE.
•Progressive buccal crown torque is provided in
the brackets of the lower posterior segments.
•This allows for buccal uprighting of these
teeth,which is beneficial in most cases.

 Lower canine torque
available in –60 ,00
,+60 ,
 The 00 and +60
options are for cases
with narrow
mandibular bone
form or prominent
canine roots,or deep
bites at start of
treatment.

Lower Cuspid, Bicuspid and Molar Torque
Lower
Cuspids
Lower 1st
Bicuspid
s
Lower 2nd
Bicuspid
s
Lower 1st
Molars
Lower 2nd
Molars
MBT
Versatile+
-6.0 -12.0 -17.0 -20.0 -10.0
Original
SWA
-11.0 -17.0 -22.0 -30.0 -35.0

TIP EDGE BRACKET SYSTEM
by Dr. Peter C. Kesling (1988).
t

Tip edge bracket
Diagonally
opposite corner
were removed
Permits desired
crown tipping
TIP LIMITING
SURFACE
FINISHING
SURFACE

 (A)Narrow metal tip edge bracket
 (B)Twin metal tip edge bracket
 (C)Narrow ceramic tip edge bracket

Lingual brackets2
Dr. Kraven Kurz of California in
1982

Generation 1
* The first Kurz lingual
appliance in 1976
has flat maxillary
occlusal bite plane
from canine to
canine
* Lower incisor
brackets are ½
rounded and these
had no hooks on
any brackets. www.indiandentalacademy.com

Generation 2 in 1980
* Hooks were added
to all canine bracket

Generation 3, 1981.
• Hooks were added to
premolars brackets.
• The first molar had
bracket with an
internal hook.
• Second molar had a
terminal sheath
without hook but had
terminal recess for
elastic traction.

Generation 4, 1982-84
 Addition of low profile
anterior inclined plane
on the central and
lateral incisor
 Bracket hooks are
optional based upon
individual treatment
needs.

• Anterior inclination plane became more
pronounced
• In the maxillary anterior region the canine also
had an inclined plane.
• Hooks are optional.

• Inclined plane on
maxillary anterior
becomes more
square in shape.
• Hooks of anterior
and premolars were
elongated hooks are
available on all
brackets.

Generation at 7, 1990 to
present
 Maxillary anterior inclined
plane is now heart shaped
with short hooks.
 The lower anterior brackets
have larger inclined plane
with short hooks.
 The premolar brackets were
widened mesiodistally and
the hooks shortened
 The increased width of
premolar bracket allows
better angulation and rotation
control
 The molar brackets now
came with either a huge cap
or a terminal sheath. www.indiandentalacademy.com

Self ligating brackets12,14
 Self ligating brackets it is defined as “a bracket
which utilizes a permanently installed
moveable component to entrap the arch wire”.

 The passive brackets use a rigid, movebale
component to entrap the arch wire.
 Tooth control is solely determined by the fit
between the arch wire and the slot.
 The slot becomes a tube and hence tooth
control is often compromised when undersized
arch wires are used.
 Damon SL, EdgeLock

Active self ligating brackets

The first self-ligating bracket, the Russell
attachment, was developed by a New York
orthodontic pioneer, Dr. Jacob Stolzenberg, in
the early 1930s

The Edgelok bracket by Dr. Jim
Wildman of Eugene, Oregon(1971)

SPEED BRACKETS
 Developed during the 1980s and introduced by
Herbert Hanson.
 The name is derived from the descriptive term
spring-loaded, precision, edge-wise, energy
and delivery.

Herbert Hanson (1986): Speed bracket.
JCO, 20, No.3, 183-189www.indiandentalacademy.com

ACTIVA BRACKET Erwin.C.
Pletcher

Time bracket by Wolfgang Heiser
of Innsbruck, Austria

References
1. William R.Proffit, ‘Contemporary Orthodontics’,Third Edition Year
2004 Elsevier , 2-4,386 – 392
2. T.M. Graber,’Orthodontics Principles and Practice,Third Edition
year 1996 ,1 -5
3. Milton b.Asbell,A Brief History Of Orthodontics American Journal
of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopedics Year 1990: Volume 98
(2);176 – 189
4. Andrews L.F. (1990): JCO interviews, JCO 24, 493-508
5. Brantley Orthodontic materials scientific and clinical aspects.
First edition 143-160
6. Andreas Karamouzos, DDS, Athanasios... Clinical characteristics
and properties of ceramic brackets: A comprehensive review
Source AJO-DO Volume 1997 Jul (34 - 40)
7. Bordeaux, Moore and Bagby Ceramic bracket base design AJO-
DO Volume 1994 Jun (552 - 560)

8. R. P. Kusy Evaluation of titanium brackets for
orthodontic treatment: Part I The passive configuration
. AJO-DO Volume 1998 Nov (558 - 572)
9. Keith, Kusy, and Whitley Evaluation of zirconia brackets -AJO-
DO Volume 1994 Dec (605 - 614)
10. Bishara and Trulove Different debonding techniques for
ceramic AJO-DO Volume 1990 Sep (263 - 273): brackets
11. Samir E. Bishara, Ceramic Brackets:A Clinical Perspective
World J Orthod 2003;4:61–66.
12. Graber T, Vanarsdall L. Current Principles and Techniques
Mosby publications third edition 314-350
13. Thomas Graber, Swain Orthodontics current principles and
techniques Jaypee brothers 572-579
14. Herbert Hanson Speed bracket. JCO, 1986: 20, No.3, 183-
189
15. Tip Edge Othodontics.R Parkhousewww.indiandentalacademy.com

16. Straight Wire,the Concept & Appliance,
Lawrence F Andrews
17. The Alexander Discipline, Contemporary
Concepts & Philosophies, R G Alexander.
18. Systemized Orthodontics Treatment
Mechanics, Mclaughlin, benett,trevesi.
19. Roth R H The Straight Wire Appliance 17
Years Later, Jco 21,632-642.
20. Treatment Mechanics For The Straight Wire
Appliance;Roth R H

Brackets part 1/endodontic courses

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Semelhante a Brackets part 1/endodontic courses

Semelhante a Brackets part 1/endodontic courses (20)

Mais de Indian dental academy

Mais de Indian dental academy (20)

Último

Último (20)

Brackets part 1/endodontic courses