Download PDF
Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2015; 47(03): 141-147
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1559777
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Karieshäufigkeit nach einer Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen: Machen linguale Brackets einen Unterschied?[*]

Caries Outcomes after Orthodontic Treatment with Fixed Appliances: Do Lingual Brackets Make a Difference?
M. H. van der Veen
1   Department for Cariology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam and Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
R. Attin
2   Klinik für Präventivzahnmedizin, Parodontologie und Kariologie, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Schweiz
,
R. Schwestka-Polly
3   Klinik für Kieferorthopädie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover
,
D. Wiechmann
4   Kieferorthopädische Fachpraxis, Bad Essen
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 October 2015 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Eine kieferorthopädische Behandlung mit festsitzenden Apparaturen gilt als Risikofaktor für die Entstehung von Initialkaries (White-Spot-Läsionen, WSL). Brackets werden traditionell auf die Bukkalflächen der Zähne aufgesetzt. Linguale Brackets werden immer weiterentwickelt und sind inzwischen allgemein verfügbar. Die Bukkalflächen der Zähne gelten als kariesanfälliger, als die Lingualflächen. Außerdem sind linguale Brackets der Morphologie der Zähne besser angepasst und sie bedecken fast die gesamten Zahnflächen. In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die Hypothese getestet, dass die Karieshäufigkeit bei lingualen Brackets geringer ist als bei bukkalen Brackets. Die Studie wurde im Split-Mouth-Design durchgeführt und die Patienten zufällig einer von 2 Gruppen zugewiesen. Im Oberkiefer wurden dabei entweder linguale oder bukkale Brackets verwendet und im Unterkiefer der jeweils andere Brackettyp. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass die Bukkalflächen der Zähne anfälliger für Karies sind, insbesondere dann, wenn White-Spot-Läsionen bereits vor Beginn einer kieferorthopädischen Behandlung vorhanden sind. Die Anzahl der neu entstandenen oder weiter fortgeschrittenen White-Spot-Läsionen war auf den Bukkalflächen 4,8-mal höher als auf den lingualen Zahnflächen. Der integrierte Fluoreszenzverlust, bestimmt anhand von quantitativen lichtinduzierten Fluoreszenzaufnahmen (QLF), war auf den bukkalen Zahnflächen 10,6-mal höher als auf den Lingualflächen. Daraus schließen wir, dass linguale Brackets in Hinblick auf die Karieshäufigkeit eine echte Alternative darstellen.

Abstract

Orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances is considered a risk factor for the development of white spot caries lesions (WSL). Traditionally, brackets are bonded to the buccal surfaces. Lingual brackets are developing rapidly and have become more readily available. Buccal surfaces are considered to be more caries prone than lingual surfaces. Furthermore, lingual brackets are shaped to fit the morphology of the teeth and seal almost the entire surface. In the present study we tested the hypothesis that lingual brackets result in a lower caries incidence than buccal brackets. We tested this hypothesis using a split-mouth design where subjects were allocated randomly to a group receiving either buccal or lingual brackets on the maxillary teeth and the alternative bracket type in the mandible. The results indicate that buccal surfaces are more prone to WSL development, especially when WSL existed before treatment. The number of WSL that developed or progressed on buccal surfaces was 4.8 times higher than the number of WSL that developed or progressed on lingual surfaces. When measured using quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), the increase in integrated fluorescence loss was 10.6 times higher buccally than lingually. We conclude that lingual brackets make a difference when caries lesion incidence is concerned.

Schlüsselwörter

Kariesprävention - linguale Orthodontie

Key words

caries prevention - lingual orthodontics

* Dieser Artikel ist im englischsprachigen Original erschienen in Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118: 298–303. Deutsche Übersetzung: Dr. Norbert Baum


 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Øgaard B, Rølla G, Arends J. Orthodontic appliances and enamel demineralization. Part 1: Lesion development. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94: 68-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Boersma JG, van der Veen MH, Lagerweij MD et al. Caries prevalence measured with QLF after treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances: influencing factors. Caries Res 2005; 39: 41-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Øgaard B. Prevalence of white spot lesions in 19-year-olds: a study on untreated and orthodontically treated persons 5 years after treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 96: 423-427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gorelick L, Geiger AM, Gwinnett AJ. Incidence of white spot formation after bonding and banding. Am J Orthod 1982; 81: 93-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Anhoury P, Nathanson D, Hughes CV et al. Microbial profile on metallic and ceramic bracket materials. Angle Orthod 2002; 72: 338-343
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lin YC, Lai YL, Chen WT et al. Kinetics of fluoride release from and reuptake by orthodontic cements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133: 427-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Paschos E, Kleinschrodt T, Clementino-Luedemann T et al. Effect of different bonding agents on prevention of enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 603-612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schmidlin PR, Schätzle M, Fischer J et al. Bonding of brackets using a caries-protective adhesive patch. J Dent 2008; 36: 125-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Benson PE, Shah AA, Millett DT et al. Fluorides, orthodontics and demineralization: a systematic review. J Orthod 2005; 32: 102-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Stecksén-Blicks C, Renfors G, Oscarson ND et al. Caries-preventive effectiveness of a fluoride varnish: a randomized controlled trial in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances. Caries Res 2007; 41: 455-459
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Øgaard B, Larsson E, Henriksson T et al. Effects of combined application of antimicrobial and fluoride varnishes in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 120: 28-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jenatschke F, Elsenberger E, Welte HD et al. Influence of repeated chlorhexidine varnish applications on mutans streptococci counts and caries increment in patients treated with fixed orthodontic appliances. J Orofac Orthop 2001; 62: 36-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lundström F, Krasse B. Streptococcus mutans and lactobacilli frequency in orthodontic patients; the effect of chlorhexidine treatments. Eur J Orthod 1987; 9: 109-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Benham AW, Campbell PM, Buschang PH. Effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants in reducing white spot lesions during orthodontic treatment. A pilot study. Angle Orthod 2009; 79: 338-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ghiz MA, Ngan P, Kao E et al. Effects of sealant and self-etching primer on enamel decalcification. Part II: an in-vivo study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 206-213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fujita K. New orthodontic treatment with lingual bracket mushroom arch wire appliance. Am J Orthod 1979; 76: 657-675
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sandham JA. Orthodontic treatment with lingually bonded brackets. Br J Orthod 1984; 11: 189-194
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Fontenelle A. Lingual bracket orthodontics: another approach. Orthod Fr 1986; 57 (Pt 2) 541-557
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gorman JC. Treatment of adults with lingual orthodontic appliances. Dent Clin North Am 1988; 32: 589-620
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ruiken R, König K, Truin GJ et al. Longitudinal study of dental caries development in Dutch children aged 8 – 12 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1986; 14: 53-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Koroluk LD, Hoover JN, Komiyama K. Factors related to plaque distribution in a group of Canadian preschool children. Int J Paediatr Dent 1994; 4: 167-172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Müller HP, Heinecke A, Eger T. Site-specific association between supragingival plaque and bleeding upon probing in young adults. Clin Oral Investig 2000; 4: 212-218
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Birkeland JM, Ibrahim YE, Ghandour IA et al. Severity of dental caries among 12-year-old Sudanese children with different fluoride exposure. Clin Oral Investig 2005; 9: 46-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Bjarnason S, Grondahl HG. Relationships between free smooth surface and proximal caries in the young permanent dentition. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1996; 24: 7-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wiechmann D, Rummel V, Thalheim A et al. Customized brackets and archwires for lingual orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 593-599
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ekstrand KR, Ricketts DN, Kidd EA. Reproducibility and accuracy of three methods for assessment of demineralization depth of the occlusal surface: an in vitro examination. Caries Res 1997; 31: 224-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB V) . Fünftes Buch. § 22: Verhütung von Zahnerkrankungen (Individualprophylaxe). Berlin: Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung; http://www.sozialgesetzbuch-sgb.de/sgbv/22.html [augferufen 1 März 2005]
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Momeni A, Hartmann T, Born C et al. Association of caries experience in adolescents with different preventive measures. Int J Public Health 2007; 52: 393-401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 van der Veen MH, de Josselin de Jong E. Application of quantitative light-induced fluorescence for assessing early caries lesions. Monogr Oral Sci 2000; 17: 144-162
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG et al. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007; 39: 175-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 de Josselin de Jong E, Sundström F, Westerling H et al. A new method for in vivo quantification of changes in initial enamel caries with laser fluorescence. Caries Res 1995; 29: 2-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar