|
|
|
|
|
|
The creation of a new lingual bracket. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Panagiotis Kanarelis
Specialist in Orthodontics, Professor of the Department of Dental Technology, Faculty of HEALTH AND CARING PROFESSIONS,TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION INSTITUTE OF ATHENS,DUOL PARIS V,Coordinator of the Lingual Orthodontic Rechearch Team of the Greek Orthodontic Society.e-mail: kana@internet.gr
www.lingualnews.com Vol 5 No 1 , May 2007 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A synthesis by the advantages of six lingual brackets (Kurz 7th generation by Ormco, Stealth bracket by American Orthodontics, Magic bracket by Dentaurum, Evolution bracket by Adenta, 2D bracket by Forestadent and recently the STb bracket by Ormco); we will offer the creation of a virtual lingual bracket. In this study we try to eliminate all disadvantages than for our 15 years experience in lingual technique exist and construct a virtual lingual bracket with the must important advantages.
A 3D virtual hypothesis of this bracket will be demonstrated.
The need for a lingual bracket useful for the orthodontist and comfortable for the patient still exists. That was the reason for the creation of a new lingual bracket with the following characteristics:
a. A bite plane (fig.1)
b. Minimum thickness and small dimensions (fig.2)
c. A well-designed pad for better bonding (fig.3)
d. A vertical slot (fig.4)
e. Tubes in the posterior brackets (fig.5)
f. Addition of hooks (fig.6)
g. Self ligation and convertible (fig.7)
h. Easy laboratory procedure (fig.8)
i. Short chair time (fig.9)
My original 2005 designs will be shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 1: A bite plane of the anterior brackets |
Fig 2: Lateral view of the virtual bracket.
Minimum thickness and small dimensions
for patient comfort and increased inter- bracket distance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 3: A well-designed pad for better bonding
|
Fig 4: Lateral view of the bracket
and the vertical slot |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 5: Tubes in the posterior brackets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 6: Hooks in the anteriors and posteriors brackets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Fig 7: An hypothesis of a self ligation and convertible bracket
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig 8:Easy laboratory procedure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Fig 9:chair time comparison between
3 different lingual brackets. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONCLUSION:
I believe the orthodontists need a new lingual bracket, small in dimension, with a vertical slot, a small hook, and additional tubes in the posterior, easy for the orthodontist and comfortable for the patient. I hope that a bracket with these characteristics will help the spreading of lingual orthodontics to our community.
REFERENCES
1. Kurz C., Alexander M., Alexander R.,Gorman J., Hilgers J., Scholz R., Smith J.: Lingual Orthodontics: A Status Report . JCO 1982 Apr (255-262)
2. Fillion, D.: A la recherche de la precision en technique a attaches linguales. Orthop Dento Faciale. Extrait Volume 1986;20: 401-12.
3. Altounian, G.: La therapeutique a attaches linguales, une autre approche de l'Orthodontie. Rev Orthop Dento Faciale 1986;20: 319-62.
4. Echarri Lobiondo,P: Lingual Orthodontics, Nexus Ediciones, Barcelona 2003.
5. Kanarelis P.: Advantages and Disadvantages of the “Magic” Bracket.Dentaurum 2nd Workshop, Hamburg, Apr.5, 2005.
6. Kokkas A., Kanarelis P.: Lingual biomecanics: vertical or horizontal slot? 6th International Orthodontic Congress, Paris, September 10-14, 2005.
7. Kanarelis P. The creation of a new lingual bracket. 6th International Orthodontic Congress. Paris 10-14 September 2005.
8. Kanarelis P., Kokkas A., Karamolegou M. Dimensions’ comparison between seven lingual brackets. 7th ESLO Congress, Venice, June 15-18 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
www.lingualnews.com
Adult and Lingual Orthodontics
EDITORS:
Dr. Silvia Geron D.M.D., M.Sc
Dr. Rafi Romano D.M.D., M.Sc
Dr. Pablo Echarri D.M.D., M.Sc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
