Comparison of the Accuracy of Virtual and Direct Bonding of Orthodontic Accessories

Overview

Journal Dental Press J Orthod

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2019 Sep 12

PMID 31508706

Citations 7

Authors

Natalice Sousa de Oliveira

Bruno Frazao Gribel

Leniana Santos Neves

Elizabeth Maria Bastos Lages

Soraia Macari

Henrique Pretti

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Conventional direct and indirect bonding techniques fail to obtain the ideal bracket position.

Objective: To compare the accuracy of virtual and conventional direct bonding of orthodontic accessories.

Methods: A single virtual configuration (dental mannequin with Class I malocclusion) served as basis for generating the reference model (treated virtually) and the intervention models (10 digital models and 10 solid models, obtained by means of prototyping). A total of 560 teeth were then equally distributed between a group of orthodontists (Group I, direct bonding; and Group II, virtual bonding), working in two different time intervals. The individual positions of the accessories were measured after three-dimensional superimposition with customized software. The Student's-t test for paired samples, and Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis, both at the level of significance of 5%.

Results: In comparison of the errors in raw values, there were significant differences only in the vertical (p< 0.001) and horizontal dimensions (p< 0.001). Considering the groups of ranges by clinical limits of the deviations, these differences were significant in the three dimensions, vertical (p< 0.001), horizontal (p= 0.044) and angular (p= 0.044).

Conclusion: Virtual bonding made it possible to obtain more precise/accurate positioning of the orthodontic accessories. The potential accuracy of this method brings new perspectives to refining the indirect bonding protocols.

Citing Articles

Simplified ABO-OGS orientation improves training of orthodontic bracket positioning for undergraduate dental students.

Liu J, Zou Y, Huang J, Chen Z, Hu J, Xu L BMC Med Educ. 2025; 25(1):280.

PMID: 39979928 PMC: 11844120. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-025-06839-y.

Evaluation of the accuracy of digital indirect bonding vs. conventional systems: a randomized clinical trial.

Soares Ueno E, de Carvalho T, Kanashiro L, Ursi W, Chilvarquer I, Neto J Angle Orthod. 2024; 95(1):3-11.

PMID: 39389581 PMC: 11662360. DOI: 10.2319/030624-179.1.

Direct versus fully digital indirect bracket bonding: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial on accuracy.

Hoekstra-van Hout P, Hoekstra J, Bruggink R, Bronkhorst E, Ongkosuwito E Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28(10):557.

PMID: 39340567 PMC: 11438723. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05950-6.

Orthodontic bracket bonding techniques and adhesion failures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dos Santos A, Wambier L, Wambier D, Moreira K, Imparato J, Chibinski A J Clin Exp Dent. 2022; 14(9):e746-e755.

PMID: 36158772 PMC: 9498638. DOI: 10.4317/jced.59768.

Bracket Transfer Accuracy with the Indirect Bonding Technique-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Sabbagh H, Khazaei Y, Baumert U, Hoffmann L, Wichelhaus A, Janjic Rankovic M J Clin Med. 2022; 11(9).

PMID: 35566695 PMC: 9099689. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11092568.

References

Miethke R, Melsen B . Effect of variation in tooth morphology and bracket position on first and third order correction with preadjusted appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116(3):329-35. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70246-5. View

Koo B, Chung C, Vanarsdall R . Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement between direct and indirect bonding techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116(3):346-51. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70248-9. View

Hodge T, Dhopatkar A, Rock W, Spary D . A randomized clinical trial comparing the accuracy of direct versus indirect bracket placement. J Orthod. 2004; 31(2):132-7. DOI: 10.1179/146531204225020427. View

Kalange J . Indirect bonding: a comprehensive review of the advantages. World J Orthod. 2005; 5(4):301-7. View

Balut N, Klapper L, Sandrik J, Bowman D . Variations in bracket placement in the preadjusted orthodontic appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 102(1):62-7. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(92)70015-3. View

Suarez C, Vilar T . The effect of constant height bracket placement on marginal ridge levelling using digitized models. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 32(1):100-5. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjp029. View

Israel M, Kusnoto B, Evans C, BeGole E . A comparison of traditional and computer-aided bracket placement methods. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(5):828-35. PMC: 8916185. DOI: 10.2319/072110-425.1. View

Mohammadi A, Moslemzadeh S . Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement with height bracket positioning gauge and boone gauge. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2012; 5(4):111-8. PMC: 3442432. DOI: 10.5681/joddd.2011.026. View

Nichols D, Gardner G, Carballeyra A . Reproducibility of bracket positioning in the indirect bonding technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144(5):770-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.023. View

10.

Castilla A, Crowe J, Moses J, Wang M, Ferracane J, Covell Jr D . Measurement and comparison of bracket transfer accuracy of five indirect bonding techniques. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84(4):607-14. PMC: 8650444. DOI: 10.2319/070113-484.1. View

11.

Iwasaki L, Covell Jr D, Frazier-Bowers S, Kapila S, Huja S, Nickel J . Personalized and precision orthodontic therapy. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015; 18 Suppl 1:1-7. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12089. View

12.

McLaughlin R, Bennett J . Evolution of treatment mechanics and contemporary appliance design in orthodontics: A 40-year perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 147(6):654-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.03.012. View

13.

Grunheid T, Lee M, Larson B . Transfer accuracy of vinyl polysiloxane trays for indirect bonding. Angle Orthod. 2015; 86(3):468-74. PMC: 8601746. DOI: 10.2319/042415-279.1. View

14.

Brown M, Koroluk L, Ko C, Zhang K, Chen M, Nguyen T . Effectiveness and efficiency of a CAD/CAM orthodontic bracket system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148(6):1067-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.07.029. View

15.

El-Timamy A, El-Sharaby F, Eid F, Mostafa Y . Three-dimensional imaging for indirect-direct bonding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 149(6):928-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.009. View

16.

Jheon A, Oberoi S, Solem R, Kapila S . Moving towards precision orthodontics: An evolving paradigm shift in the planning and delivery of customized orthodontic therapy. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2017; 20 Suppl 1:106-113. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12171. View

17.

Kim J, Chun Y, Kim M . Accuracy of bracket positions with a CAD/CAM indirect bonding system in posterior teeth with different cusp heights. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018; 153(2):298-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.06.017. View

18.

Schmid J, Brenner D, Recheis W, Hofer-Picout P, Brenner M, Crismani A . Transfer accuracy of two indirect bonding techniques-an in vitro study with 3D scanned models. Eur J Orthod. 2018; 40(5):549-555. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjy006. View

19.

Aguirre M, King G, Waldron J . Assessment of bracket placement and bond strength when comparing direct bonding to indirect bonding techniques. Am J Orthod. 1982; 82(4):269-76. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(82)90461-4. View