A comparative study of the effect of the intrusion arch and straight wire mechanics on incisor root resorption: A randomized,controlled trial

Objective:To analyze and compare external apical root resorption (EARR) of maxillary incisors treated by intrusion arch or continuous archwire mechanics.Materials and Methods:This cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) study analyzed 28 deep bite patients in the permanent dentition who were randomly divided into two groups: Group 1, 12 patients with initial mean age of 15.1 ± 1.6 years and mean overbite of 4.6 ± 1.2 mm treated with the Connecticut intrusion arch (CIA) in the upper arch (Ortho Organizers, Carlsbad, Calif) for a mean period of 5.8 ± 1.27 months. Group 2, 16 patients with initial mean age of 22.1 ± 5.7 years and mean overbite of 4.1 ± 1.1 mm treated with conventional leveling and alignment using continuous archwire mechanics for 6.1 ± 0.81 months. The degree of EARR was detected in 112 maxillary incisors by using CBCT scans and a three-dimensional program (Dolphin 11.7, Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif). The CBCT scans were obtained before (T1) and 6 months after initiation of treatment (T2). Differences between and within groups were assessed by nonpaired and paired t-tests, respectively, with a 5% significance level.Results:Significant differences were found for both groups between T1 and T2 (P < .05) indicating that EARR occurred in both groups. However, there were no significant differences when EARR was compared between group 1 (−0.76 mm) and group 2 (−0.59 mm).Conclusions:The Connecticut intrusion arch did not lead to greater EARR of maxillary incisors when compared with conventional orthodontic mechanics.     

A comparison of treatment effects of total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate vs buccal miniscrews

Objective:The purpose of this study was to compare the treatment effects of palatally vs buccally placed temporary anchorage devices.Materials and Methods:Of 40 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients, 22 were treated with modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) appliances (age 21.9 ± 6.6 years), and 18 (age 24.2 ± 6.8 years) were treated with buccally placed miniscrews between the maxillary first molar and second premolar. A total of 26 linear and angular measurements were analyzed on pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the treatment effects within each group and to compare the effects between groups.Results:Overall, the MCPP appliances showed 4.2 mm of distalization, 1.6 mm of intrusion of the first molar with 2° tipping, and 0.8 mm extrusion of incisors. The miniscrew group resulted in 2.0 mm of distalization, 0.1 mm intrusion of the first molar with 7.2° tipping, and 0.3 mm of incisor extrusion. Regarding soft tissue change, in the MCPP group, the upper lip was significantly retracted (P < .001).Conclusions:Comparing the treatment effects between MCPP appliances and buccal miniscrews, the MCPP appliances showed greater distalization and intrusion with less distal tipping of the first molar and more extrusion of the incisor compared to the buccal miniscrews.     

Response of the maxillary dentition to a statically determinate one-couple system with tip-back mechanics: A prospective clinical trial

Objective:To quantify the effects of tip-back mechanics on the maxillary first molars and incisors.Materials and Methods:Sixteen subjects with Class II end-on malocclusion were treated with an intrusion arch to achieve distalization of the maxillary molar through tip-back mechanics. Lateral cephalograms were taken prior to molar tip-back (T1), after molar tip-back (T2), and after molar root uprighting (T3). Data were analyzed using the Friedman’s and Wilcoxon signed rank tests to evaluate differences in time points (P ≤ .016).Results:The maxillary first molar distalized 1.53 mm (P = .001) with 6.65° (P = .001) of distal tipping and 0.86 mm (P = .001) of extrusion at T2. Minor relapse of the first molar (mesial direction) was seen at T3. The maxillary incisors flared labially 0.4 mm, and the incisor root apex moved palatally 1.19 mm (P = .005) at T2. At T3, the incisor root apex moved palatally 1.5 mm (P = .003) from T1. An angular change from T1 of 3.31° (P = .008) and 3.53° (P = .014) was seen at T2 and T3, respectively, as a result of palatal root movement of the maxillary incisors.Conclusions:A significant amount of distalization of maxillary molars was attained at the crown level with tip-back mechanics. Palatal root angulation change was significant in the incisors with minimal anteroposterior movement of the incisal edge.     

Do orthopedic corrections of growing retrognathic hyperdivergent patients produce stable results?

Objectives:To determine if posterior dental intrusion produces stable orthodontic and orthopedic corrections in growing retrognathic hyperdivergent patients.Materials and Methods:The sample included 14 subjects (five males and nine females), who were 13.4 ± 0.7 years pretreatment, treated for 3.5 years, and followed for 3.6 years posttreatment. During the initial orthopedic phase, 150 g NiTi coil springs were attached to two palatal miniscrew implants (MSIs) for maxillary intrusion; two buccal mandibular MSIs were used for posterior vertical control. Full orthodontic therapy was initiated to correct the malocclusions during the orthodontic phase. Patients were recalled a minimum of 1 year posttreatment (mean 3.6 ±1.6 years). Patients were compared to matched untreated controls.Results:Relative to the untreated controls, during treatment and retention, maxillary and mandibular molars underwent 2.8 mm and 3.7 mm of relative posterior intrusion, respectively. Maxillary incisors were extruded 1.3 mm and the mandibular incisors underwent 2.9 mm of relative intrusion. Overall orthopedic changes included a reduction in the mandibular plane angle (MPA; 3.3°), an increase in SN-Pg (2.4°), an increase in S-N-B (2.1°), and a 4.3 mm relative reduction in anterior facial height. The maxillary incisors, which showed 0.6 mm of intrusion (relative to controls), was the only dental or skeletal measure to show a statistically significant between-group posttreatment difference.Conclusions:Except for maxillary incisor position, the substantial dental intrusion and associated orthopedic corrections that were produced during treatment remained stable post-treatment.     

Effects of long-term use of the lower lingual arch from 8.5 years to 13.2 years

ObjectivesTo investigate the effects of long-term use of the lower lingual arch (LLA) on the sagittal and vertical positions of the permanent lower incisors and first molars.Materials and MethodsThe sample consisted of 98 patients who were treated with an LLA (LLA group) and 39 patients who were treated without an LLA (no-LLA group). The positional changes of the lower incisors and first molars were analyzed after performing mandibular structural superimpositions on lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before treatment (T1) and at the end of LLA therapy (T2). The mean ages at T1 and T2 were 8.5 years and 13.2 years, respectively. Study casts were analyzed to quantify arch dimensional changes.ResultsMesial movement of the lower molar cusp was similar between the LLA and no-LLA groups, but the vertical position was slightly greater at T2 in the LLA group. In the LLA group, there was a molar tip-back effect, and the lower incisors were proclined 4.2° more than in the no-LLA group. Arch perimeter decreased 3.6 ± 2.6 mm without an LLA and 0.97 ± 3.7 mm with an LLA. Intercanine and intermolar widths both increased about 1 mm more with an LLA (P < .0001).ConclusionsThe LLA does not seem to restrict mesial movement and vertical eruption of the lower incisors and molars in the long term. The LLA effectively preserves the arch perimeter at the expense of a slight lower incisor proclination.     

Distalization pattern of the maxillary arch depending on the number of orthodontic miniscrews

Objective:To determine the effects of linear force vector(s) from interradicular miniscrews on the distalization pattern of the maxillary arch in adult Class II patients.Materials and Methods:Twenty-five adult patients with mild to moderate Class II dentition and minimal crowding were collected. Either single (group A, n  =  12) or dual (group B, n  =  13) miniscrews were inserted on the posterior interradicular area to deliver a distalizing force to the main archwire. The displacement patterns of maxillary incisors and molars were measured and compared.Results:Significant distalization in the molars and incisors was shown in both groups. Significantly greater distalization and intrusion of the first molar and intrusive displacement of the incisor, together with significant reduction of the mandibular plane, were noted in group B, in contrast to the rotation of the occlusal plane in group A.Conclusions:Interradicular miniscrews predictably induced total arch distalization, leading to the correction of Class II. Additional miniscrews in the premolar area appear to facilitate intrusion and distalization of the entire arch according to the position of the force vectors.     

Geometric morphometric analysis of the palatal morphology in children with impacted incisors: A three-dimensional evaluation

Objective:To analyze variations in palatal morphology in subjects presenting unilaterally impacted maxillary permanent central incisors compared with a control group of subjects without eruption anomalies using a three-dimensional (3D) analysis.Materials and Methods:Twenty-six white subjects (10 girls and 16 boys; mean age 9.5 ± 1.5 years) with unilaterally impacted maxillary permanent central incisors (impacted incisor group [IIG]) were compared with a control group (CG) of 26 subjects (14 girls and 12 boys, mean age 8.7 ± 1.6 years) presenting no eruption disorders. For each subject, dental casts were taken and the upper arch was scanned using a 3D laser scanner. To study the entirety of the shape of the palate in any point of the surface, 3D geometric morphometrics was applied.Results:Subjects with impacted maxillary incisors showed skeletal adaptations of the maxilla. In the IIG, both the superior palatal region and lateral palatal surface showed significantly different morphology when compared with CG, with a narrower and higher palatal vault.Conclusion:The absence of maxillary central incisors over the physiological age of eruption influenced the development of the palatal morphology compared with subjects without eruption anomalies.     

Treatment of Class III malocclusion using miniscrew-anchored inverted Forsus FRD: Controlled clinical trial

Objectives:To evaluate the skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes after the use of miniscrew-anchored inverted Forsus fatigue-resistant device (FRD) in treatment of Class III malocclusion.Materials and Methods:In this controlled clinical trial, 16 patients (9 girls and 7 boys; age 12.45 ± 0.87 years) were consecutively treated with miniscrew-anchored inverted Forsus FRD. This group was compared with a matched control group of 16 untreated patients (8 girls and 8 boys; age 11.95 ± 1.04 years). Miniscrews were inserted bilaterally between the maxillary canine and first premolar. Forsus FRD was selected and inserted in an inverted manner mesial to the mandibular headgear tube and distal to the maxillary canine bracket.Results:Class I molar and canine relationships with positive overjet were achieved in an average period of 6.4 ± 1.46 months. Maxillary forward growth showed a statistically significant increase (SNA°: 1.73 ± 0.53, P < .5), maxillary incisor proclination was statistically significant (U1 to NA°: −0.39 ± 0.33, P > .5), and the lower incisors exhibited significant retroclination (L1 to NB°: 1.65 ± 0.83, P < .5). Significant lower lip retrusion and upper lip protrusion were obvious treatment outcomes (P < .5).Conclusions:The use of miniscrew-anchored inverted FRD could effectively increase maxillary forward growth, but it did not prevent mesial movement of the maxillary dentition. Significant lower incisor retroclination was observed. Significant esthetic improvement of the facial profile was achieved primarily because of lower lip retrusion and upper lip protrusion.     

Effect of the inclination of a maxillary central incisor on periodontal stress: Finite element analysis

Objective:To determine the effect of labiolingual inclination of a maxillary central incisor on the magnitude and distribution of stresses within the periodontal space.Materials and Methods:Five three-dimensional finite element models of a right maxillary central incisor were created with 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, and 40° inclination. Each incisor model was subjected to a 1 N lingual-directed force and 6–12 N·mm countertipping moment on the labial surface. The stress level within the periodontal ligament was calculated in terms of maximum principal stresses.Results:With increased inclination, compressive stresses tended to increase whereas tensile stresses tended to decrease. The location where compressive stress was prevalent changed from the midroot area to the apical area on the lingual side, while the area where tensile stresses were predominant changed from the midroot area to the cervical area on the labial side.Conclusion:There are more compressive stresses concentrated at the apex of incisors with a high degree of inclination than in incisors that are more upright. This may be associated with the higher clinical incidence of apical root resorption found in inclined maxillary central incisors.     

Long-term stability of miniscrew anchored maxillary molar distalization in Class II treatment

ObjectiveTo investigate treatment stability of miniscrew-anchored maxillary distalization in Class II malocclusion.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study included a distalization (n = 19) and a control (n = 19) group; a patient group with minor corrections served the control. Lateral cephalograms of 38 adult patients were taken before (T0), immediately after (T1), and 3–4 years after (T2) treatment. Horizontal and vertical movement and tipping of the maxillary first molars (U6) and central incisors (U1) were measured along with skeletal craniofacial parameters at three time points to compare the two groups regarding the achieved treatment effects and their stability.ResultsTotal arch distalization therapy led to 4.2 mm of distal movement of U6 without distal crown tipping (0.6° of axis change) and 3.3° of occlusal plane steepening. Over an average retention period of 42 months, maxillary total arch distalization provided high stability of treatment results, showing the same amount of mesial movement (0.7 mm) as the control group.ConclusionsIn Class II treatment, miniscrew-anchored maxillary total arch distalization can provide stable distal movement of the maxillary first molars and central incisors.     

Herbst treatment with mandibular cast splints—revisited

Objective:The objective of this study was to reassess the dento-skeletal treatment effects and the amount of anchorage loss during reduced mandibular splint (RMS) Herbst treatment.Materials and Methods:One hundred consecutive Class II patients treated with a RMS-Herbst appliance were analyzed. The mean pretreatment age of the patients was 14.5 years, and the mean treatment time with the Herbst appliance was 8.1 months. Both before (T1) and after (T2) Herbst treatment a cephalometric measurement of lower incisor inclination, a sagittal occlusion analysis, and a dental cast analysis were performed. A comparison was performed with a historic Herbst control group treated with total mandibular cast splints (TMS).Results:During treatment the lower incisors proclined markedly (12.9° ± 4.6°). The amount of incisor proclination in the RMS group was, on average, 3.6° larger (P < .001) than in the TMS group. The lower incisor proclination increased from 11.9° (prepeak) to 14.3° (young adult). The level of professional experience of the practitioners performing the treatment did not influence the amount of incisor proclination significantly. The total available space in the lower arch increased by an average of 1.8 mm, and a space opened between the lower second premolars and lower permanent first molars in 62% of the present RMS-Herbst (average of 0.4 mm per side).Conclusions:Treatment with RMS-Herbst appliances leads to higher proclination of the lower incisors than does treatment with TMS-Herbst appliances; it also leads to an overall larger amount of anchorage loss.     

Combined use of miniscrews and continuous arch for intrusive root movement of incisors in Class II division 2 with gummy smile

Adequate intrusion and torque control of the retroclined maxillary incisors are critical for the treatment of Class II division 2 (div2) malocclusion. In addition, anterior retraction via lingual root movement can be challenging. This case report demonstrates a combined use of miniscrews and continuous arch with additional torque for intrusion, retraction, and torque control of maxillary incisors in the Class II div2 with gummy smile. A 20-year-old woman presented with multiple issues, including impacted canine, lip protrusion, prolonged retained mandibular primary molar, and two missing maxillary premolars. In order to improve her facial profile and eliminate the need for prosthetic work, the mandibular primary molar and contralateral premolar were extracted. Two miniscrews were placed at the maxillary buccal alveolar bone to apply the posterosuperior force for retraction of anterior teeth, with additional labial crown torque on the arch wire. The results were the intrusion (4 mm) and lingual root movement (17°) of the maxillary incisors without anchorage loss of maxillary molars, flattening of the Curve of Spee, and Class I molar relation that were maintained after 50 months of retention period. The combined use of miniscrews and continuous arch could be a reliable and effective treatment modality for torque control and intrusion of retroclined maxillary incisors in the Class II div2 patient.     

Changes in mandibular incisor position and arch form resulting from Invisalign correction of the crowded dentition treated nonextraction

Objective:To investigate changes in mandibular incisor position resulting from Invisalign correction of the crowded dentition without extraction.Materials and Methods:A retrospective chart review was completed on 61 adult White patients. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the value of pretreatment crowding of the lower dentition: 20 mild (2.0–3.9 mm), 22 moderate (4.0–5.9 mm), and 19 severe (>6.0 mm). Cephalometric radiographs were measured to determine lower incisor changes. Interproximal reduction and changes in arch width were also measured. Statistical evaluation of T₀ and T₁ values using paired t-tests and analysis of covariance were applied to evaluate mean value changes.Results:Lower incisor position and angulation changes were statistically significant in the severe crowding group. There were no statistically significant differences in lower incisor position between the mild and moderate crowding groups. There was a statistically significant increase in buccal expansion in each of the three groups.Conclusions:Invisalign^® treatment can successfully resolve mandibular arch crowding using a combination of buccal arch expansion, interproximal reduction, and lower incisor proclination. When there is <6 mm of crowding, lower incisor position remained relatively stable. The lower incisors proclined and protruded in the more severely crowded dentitions (>6 mm).     

Camouflage treatment of skeletal Class III malocclusion with multiloop edgewise arch wire and modified Class III elastics by maxillary mini-implant anchorage

Objective:To evaluate the effect of the multiloop edgewise arch wire (MEAW) technique with maxillary mini-implants in the camouflage treatment of skeletal Class III malocclusion.Materials and Methods:Twenty patients were treated with the MEAW technique and modified Class III elastics from the maxillary mini-implants. Twenty-four patients were treated with MEAW and long Class III elastics from the upper second molars as control. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained and analyzed before and after treatment, and 1 year after retention.Results:Satisfactory occlusion was established in both groups. Through principal component analysis, it could be concluded the anterior-posterior dental position, skeletal sagittal and vertical position, and upper molar vertical position changed within groups and between groups; vertical lower teeth position and Wits distance changed in the experimental group and between groups. In the experimental group, the lower incisors tipped lingually 2.7 mm and extruded 2.4 mm. The lingual inclination of the lower incisors increased 3.5°. The mandibular first molars tipped distally 9.1° and intruded 0.4 mm. Their cusps moved 3.4 mm distally. In the control group, the upper incisors proclined 3°, and the upper first molar extruded 2 mm. SN-MP increased 1.6° and S-Go/N-ME decreased 1.Conclusions:The MEAW technique combined with modified Class III elastics by maxillary mini-implants can effectively tip the mandibular molars distally without any extrusion and tip the lower incisors lingually with extrusion to camouflage skeletal Class III malocclusions. Clockwise rotation of the mandible and further proclination of upper incisors can be avoided. The MEAW technique and modified Class III elastics provided an appropriate treatment strategy especially for patients with high angle and open bite tendency.     

Maxillary anterior alignment stability in Class I and Class II malocclusions treated with or without extraction

Objective:To compare the postretention stability of maxillary incisors alignment in subjects with Class I and II malocclusion treated with or without extractions.Materials and Methods:The sample comprised 103 subjects with initial maxillary anterior irregularity greater than 3 mm and was divided into four groups: group 1 comprised 19 patients with Class I malocclusion treated with nonextraction (mean initial age = 13.06 years); group 2 comprised 19 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with nonextraction (mean initial age = 12.54 years); group 3 comprised 30 patients with Class I malocclusion treated with extractions (mean initial age = 13.16 years); group 4 comprised 35 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with extractions (mean initial age = 12.99 years). Dental casts were obtained at three different stages: pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and long-term posttreatment (T3). Maxillary incisor irregularity and arch dimensions were evaluated. Intergroup comparisons were performed by one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey tests.Results:In the long-term posttreatment period, relapse of maxillary crowding and arch dimensions was similar in all groups.Conclusion:Changes in maxillary anterior alignment in Class I and Class II malocclusions treated with nonextractions and with extractions were similar in the long-term posttreatment period.     

A randomized clinical trial comparing mandibular incisor proclination produced by fixed labial appliances and clear aligners

Objective:To compare the mandibular incisor proclination produced by fixed labial appliances and third generation clear aligners.Materials and Methods:Patients underwent a course of orthodontic treatment using either fixed labial appliances or clear aligners (Invisalign). Mandibular incisor proclination was measured by comparing pretreatment and near-end treatment lateral cephalograms. Eligibility criteria included adult patients with mild mandibular incisor crowding (<4 mm) and Class I skeletal bases (ANB, 1–4°). The main outcome was the cephalometric change in mandibular incisor inclination to the mandibular plane at the end of treatment. Eligible patients picking a sealed opaque envelope, which indicated their group allocation, was used to achieve randomization. Data was analyzed using a Welch two-sample t-test.Results:Forty-four patients (mean age, 26.4 ± 7.7 years) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the fixed labial appliance or the clear aligner group. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups: Fixed appliance mean crowding was 2.1 ± 1.3 mm vs clear aligner mean crowding, 2.5 ± 1.3 mm; pretreatment mean mandibular incisor inclination for the fixed appliance group was 90.8 ± 5.4° vs 91.6 ± 6.4° for the clear aligner group. Fixed appliances produced 5.3 ± 4.3° of mandibular incisor proclination. Clear aligners proclined the mandibular incisors by 3.4 ± 3.2°. The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P > .05).Conclusion:There was no difference in the amount of mandibular incisor proclination produced by clear aligners and fixed labial appliances in mild crowding cases.     

The Class II Carriere Motion appliance:: A 3D CBCT evaluation of the effects on the dentition

ObjectivesTo determine three-dimensional treatment changes produced by the Class II Carriere Motion appliance (CMA) in Class II adolescent patients with Class I and Class II skeletal relationships.Materials and MethodsThe sample included 59 adolescents (16 boys and 43 girls) with unilateral or bilateral Class II molar and bilateral Class II canine relationship. They were divided into group 1 with skeletal Class I (N = 27; ANB 2.90° ± 1.40°; 13.30 ± 1.53 years) and group 2 with skeletal Class II (N = 32; ANB 6.06° ± 1.64°; 13.26 ± 1.76 years). Cone beam computed tomography images were traced with Invivo software pretreatment (T1) and post-CMA usage (T2). The treatment changes in 36 measurements were calculated in each group, and the changes in 16 measurements were compared between them.ResultsIn group 1 and 2, maxillary first molars underwent significant distal movement (1.92 mm ± 0.80 mm and 1.67 mm ± 1.56 mm, respectively) with distal tipping and rotation, maxillary canines underwent significant distal movement (2.34 mm ± 1.07 mm and 2.24 mm ± 1.91 mm, respectively) with distal tipping and rotation, and mandibular molars underwent significant mesial movement (–1.37 mm ± 1.23 mm and –2.51 mm ± 1.51 mm, respectively) with mesial tipping. Between the groups, there were significant differences in mandibular molar mesial movement and the U1-SN changes (P < .05).ConclusionsThe CMA corrected Class II malocclusion through distal tipping and rotational movement of maxillary canines and molars and corrected mesial tipping of mandibular molars. Significantly more mandibular molar mesial movement and maxillary incisor flaring were observed in patients with skeletal Class II.     

Treatment effects of skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ and Herbst appliances: A retrospective clinical study

Objective:To evaluate the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the Forsus FRD appliance with miniplate anchorage inserted in the mandibular symphyses and to compare the findings with a well-matched control group treated with a Herbst appliance for the correction of a skeletal Class II malocclusion due to mandibular retrusion.Materials and Methods:The sample consisted of 32 Class II subjects divided into two groups. Group I consisted of 16 patients (10 females and 6 males; mean age, 13.20 ± 1.33 years) treated using the Forsus FRD EZ appliance with miniplate anchorage inserted in the mandibular symphyses. Group II consisted of 16 patients (9 females and 7 males; mean age, 13.56 ± 1.27 years) treated using the Herbst appliance. Seventeen linear and 10 angular measurements were performed to evaluate and compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the appliances using paired and Student''s t-tests.Results:Both appliances were effective in correcting skeletal class II malocclusion and showed similar skeletal and soft tissue changes. The maxillary incisor was statistically significantly more retruded in the skeletally anchored Forsus FRD group (P < .01). The mandibular incisor was retruded in the skeletally anchored Forsus FRD group (−4.09° ± 5.12°), while it was protruded in the Herbst group (7.50° ± 3.98°) (P < .001).Conclusion:Although both appliances were successful in correcting the skeletal Class II malocclusion, the skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ appliance did so without protruding the mandibular incisors.     

An assessment of conventional and self-ligating brackets in Class I maxillary constriction patients

Objective:To evaluate two different treatment systems with regard to incisor position, transverse dimension changes in maxillary arch, changes in maxillary molar inclinations, clinical periodontal parameters, and pain intensity in patients with a Class I malocclusion.Materials and Methods:Seventeen patients (with a mean age of 14.5 years) underwent orthodontic treatment with the Roth prescribed edgewise bracket systems after expanding the maxillary arch with a quad-helix appliance, and 16 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 years) underwent orthodontic treatment with the Damon 3MX bracket system. Each subject''s lateral cephalometric and posteroanterior radiographs and dental casts were obtained at the beginning of the treatment and after debonding. In addition to these, the periodontal index and pain scores were taken.Results:Cephalometric data showed that in both treatment systems, overjet value decreased and maxillary and mandibular incisors proclined. Posteroanterior measurements demonstrated a greater increase in the maxillary molar inclination in the Damon group. Significant increase of maxillary intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths was shown in both systems. Periodontal index and pain score changes between different observation periods were the same.Conclusions:The conventional and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the incisor position, transverse dimension changes in maxillary arch, clinical periodontal parameters, and pain intensity. The only significant difference was that the Damon system inclined the maxillary molars more buccally than the conventional group.