Evaluation of Frictional Resistance to Sliding of Coated Stainless Steel Arch Wires in Different Esthetic Brackets. An In-Vitro Study

Abstract

Objective: To assess and compare the Teflon-coated stainless steel arch wires' frictional resistance to sliding in several contemporary, aesthetically pleasing ceramic brackets. \

Materials and Methods: The current study examined the static and kinetic frictional resistance between four contemporary, aesthetically pleasing ceramic orthodontic brackets [0.022" x 0.028"]: Teflon-coated stainless steel archwire [0.019" X 0.025"] and polycrystalline ceramic with metal slot, monocrystalline ceramic, polycrystalline self-ligating ceramic with metal slot, and polycrystalline self-ligating ceramic without metal slot. Using a saliva substitute, static and kinetic friction were measured in a wet condition on a universal testing apparatus. ANOVA statistical test was used to compare the brackets.

Results: The least amount of friction was found overall in polycrystalline self-ligating ceramic brackets without metal slots. When it came to self-ligated brackets, polycrystalline without a metal slot had lower values than polycrystalline with one, but among traditionally ligated brackets, polycrystalline with a metal slot demonstrated significantly less [p < 0.05] friction than monocrystalline. Compared to ceramic brackets that were conventionally ligated, self-ligated brackets showed a much lower [p < 0.001] frictional resistance to sliding.

Conclusion: In conclusion, polycrystalline brackets with metal slots are a good substitute for monocrystalline brackets in traditionally ligated ceramic brackets. In order to reduce friction, self-ligating ceramic brackets offer a viable substitute for ceramic brackets that are traditionally ligated. When aesthetics and friction are taken into account in the case of labial orthodontics, the most promising bracket currently on the market is the polycrystalline self-ligating ceramic bracket without a metal slot.