Search

Is there any difference between conventional, passive self-ligating and active edgewise self ligating brackets a systematic review of the literature and network meta analysis.Yves G. Bolender. Episode 36. IOC 2020

Play episode
Hosted by
Farooq Ahmed

Systematic review:

Significant findings favour self ligating

  1. Time to tie an archwire: 107 seconds (CI 95%: -111 -103)
  2. Time to remove an archwire: 23 seconds (CI 95%: -27 -18)
  3. Bleeding on probing (at 4 weeks): -0.10 (CI 95%: -0.12 – -0.08)
  4. Expansion inter-canine width: 0.5mm (CI 95%: -0.91 – -0.11)

Significant findings favour conventional ligating

  1. Pain perception (in 19x25SS): 18 (CI 95%: -5.4 -31.1)
  2. Expansion inter-molar width: 0.5mm (CI 95%: 0.07-0.94)

Significant findings in favour of active self ligating

  1. Time to align mandibular teeth: 10 days (CI 95%: -17.8 -2.3)

Non significant finding

  1. Treatment duration: 0.94 (CI 95%: -0.39-2.26)
  2. Total number of appointments: 0.35 (CI 95%: -0.67-1.36)
  3. Time to align mandibular teeth: No difference Vs conventional ligation 55 days (CI 95%: -122-232)
  4. Reduction in irregularity: 0.10 (CI 95%: -0.7-0.5)
  5. Speed of space closure: -10 (CI 95%: -0.31-0.11)
  6. Pain perception in alignment
  7. Bracket failure rate: -47 (CI 95%: 0.58-3.79)
  8. Treatment outcomes: PAR / ICON
  9. IMPA: -25 (CI 95%: 1.05-1.56)
  10. Root resorption: -05 (CI 95%: -2.60- 0.50)

References

Maizeray, R., Wagner, D., Lévy-Bénichou, H., Lefebvre, F. and Bolender, Y., 2019. IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONVENTIONAL, PASSIVE SELF-LIGATING AND ACTIVE SELF-LIGATING BRACKETS? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS: 254. European Journal of Orthodontics41(5).

Join the discussion