Effect of bracket type on halitosis,periodontal status,and microbial colonization

Objective: To determine the effect of bracket type on halitosis, periodontal status, and microbial colonization.Materials and Methods:Forty-six patients scheduled for fixed orthodontic treatment (age 11–16 years) were selected from the orthodontic department of Suleyman Demirel University. Patients were divided into two groups with random distribution of brackets; 23 patients were treated with self-ligating brackets (group SLBs), the others with conventional brackets (group CBs). Halitosis measurements and periodontal and microbial records were obtained before the placement of brackets (T0), 1 week later (T1), and 5 weeks after bonding (T2). Periodontal parameters, including plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and bleeding on probing index (BOP), were obtained from all the bonded teeth. Halitosis measurements were performed at the same time. Microbial samples were obtained from the buccal surfaces of all the bonded teeth. Data were analyzed by using a repeated-measurement analysis of variance test for the comparison of parameters between groups and times.Results:Periodontal parameters and halitosis results were higher in the CBs group than in the SLBs group (P < .05). In the SLBs group, halitosis and BOP values revealed no pronounced changes between T1 and T2 (P > .05). Intra- and intergroup comparisons showed that there were no statistically significant differences for microbial colonization between all the time intervals (P > .05).Conclusion:Bracket type has an effect on halitosis and periodontal status. Therefore, self-ligating brackets may be advised in order to prevent patients from developing halitosis and to increase the likelihood of good oral hygiene during orthodontic treatment.     

Clinical and microbiological parameters in patients with self-ligating and conventional brackets during early phase of orthodontic treatment

Objective:To determine the effect of different bracket designs (conventional brackets and self-ligating brackets) on periodontal clinical parameters and periodontal pathogens in subgingival plaque.Material and Methods:The following inclusion criteria were used: requirement of orthodontic treatment plan starting with alignment and leveling, good general health, healthy periodontium, no antibiotic therapy in the previous 6 months before the beginning of the study, and no smoking. The study sample totaled 38 patients (13 male, 25 female; mean age, 14.6 ± 2.0 years). Patients were divided into two groups with random distribution of brackets. Recording of clinical parameters was done before the placement of the orthodontic appliance (T0) and at 6 weeks (T1), 12 weeks (T2), and 18 weeks (T3) after full bonding of orthodontic appliances. Periodontal pathogens of subgingival microflora were detected at T3 using a commercially available polymerase chain reaction test (micro-Dent test) that contains probes for Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Tannerella forsythia, and Treponema denticola.Results:There was a statistically significant higher prevalence of A actinomycetemcomitans in patients with conventional brackets than in patients with self-ligating brackets, but there was no statistically significant difference for other putative periodontal pathogens. The two different types of brackets did not show statistically significant differences in periodontal clinical parameters.Conclusion:Bracket design does not seem to have a strong influence on periodontal clinical parameters and periodontal pathogens in subgingival plaque. The correlation between some periodontal pathogens and clinical periodontal parameters was weak.     

Comparison of root resorption between self-ligating and conventional preadjusted brackets using cone beam computed tomography

Objective:To compare the magnitude of external apical root resorption (EARR) of incisors in patients undergoing the initial phase of orthodontic treatment with two sets of brackets.Materials and Methods:According to the results of the power analysis for sample size calculation, 19 Angle Class I patients (anterior crowding: 3 to 5 mm; mean age: 20.6 years) were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups: group I (n  =  11, self-ligating brackets) and group II (n  =  8, conventional preadjusted brackets). The degree of EARR was detected in 152 upper and lower incisors by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and a three-dimensional program (Dolphin 11.5, Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif) with 25% level of sensitivity. The CBCT scans were obtained before (T1) and 6 months after initiation of treatment (T2). Differences between and within groups were analyzed by nonpaired and paired t-test, respectively, with 5% significance level.Results:Significant differences were found for both groups between T1 and T2. However, no differences in the degree of EARR were detected between the groups studied.Conclusions:Although EARR has occurred in all teeth evaluated, the bracket design (self-ligating or conventional) did not demonstrate any influence on the results observed.     

Debris and friction of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic brackets after clinical use

Objective:To compare the degree of debris and friction of conventional and self-ligating orthodontic brackets before and after clinical use.Materials and Methods:Two sets of three conventional and self-ligating brackets were bonded from the first molar to the first premolar in eight individuals, for a total of 16 sets per type of brackets. A passive segment of 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was inserted into each group of brackets. Frictional force and debris level were evaluated as received and after 8 weeks of intraoral exposure. Two-way analysis of variance and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were applied at P < .05.Results:After the intraoral exposure, there was a significant increase of debris accumulation in both systems of brackets (P < .05). However, the self-ligating brackets showed a higher amount of debris compared with the conventional brackets. The frictional force in conventional brackets was significantly higher when compared with self-ligating brackets before clinical use (P < .001). Clinical exposure for 8 weeks provided a significant increase of friction (P < .001) on both systems. In the self-ligating system, the mean of friction increase was 0.21 N (191%), while 0.52 N (47.2%) was observed for the conventional system.Conclusion:Self-ligating and conventional brackets, when exposed to the intraoral environment, showed a significant increase in frictional force during the sliding mechanics. Debris accumulation was higher for the self-ligating system.     

Effect of the bracket types on microbial colonization and periodontal status

Objective:To evaluate the effect of different bracket types on the levels of Streptococcus mutans (SM) and Lactobacillus (LB) in saliva, in plaque, and on the periodontal condition.Materials and Methods:Forty patients aged 14 to 16 years, who had Angle Class I malocclusion with minimal crowding, were nonsmokers, were without systematic disease, and did not use antibiotics or oral mouth rinses during the 3-month period before the study were randomly selected. The patients were subdivided into two groups with random allocation of bracket type: conventional brackets (CB; Avex Mx, OPAL orth.) with steel wire ligature or self-ligating brackets (SLB; F1000, Leone S.p.A.). Microbial and periodontal records were obtained before bonding (T₁) and 1 month after bonding (T₂). Microbial samples were collected from the stimulated saliva and the plaque from the labial surfaces of the upper and lower lateral incisors. To estimate the number of colony-forming units of SM and LB, Dentocult SM and LB kits were used. The plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and pocket depth (PD) values were recorded to evaluate the periodontal condition. Paired t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the groups statistically.Results:No significant differences occurred in SM or LB colonization between the groups. In the SLB group, PI, GI, and PD values increased significantly (P < .05). A greater increase was found in PD value in the SLB group (0.98 mm) compared with the CB group (0.04 mm; P < .05).Conclusions:The F1000 SLB do not have an advantage over Avex Mx CB with respect to periodontal status and colonization of SM and LB.     

Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets: A randomized clinical trial

Objective:To measure space closure during the retraction of upper permanent canines with self-ligating and conventional brackets.Materials and Methods:Fifteen patients who required maxillary canine retraction into first premolar extraction sites as part of their orthodontic treatment completed this study. In a random split-mouth design, the retraction of upper canines was performed using an elastomeric chain with 150 g of force. The evaluations were performed in dental casts (T0, initial; T1, 4 weeks; T2, 8 weeks; T3, 12 weeks). The amount of movement and the rotation of the canines as well as anchorage loss of the upper first molars were evaluated.Results:There was no difference between self-ligating and conventional brackets regarding the distal movement of upper canines and mesial movement of first molars (P > .05). Rotation of the upper canines was minimized with self-ligating brackets (P < .05).Conclusion:Distal movement of the upper canines and anchorage loss of the first molars were similar with both conventional and self-ligating brackets. Rotation of the upper canines during sliding mechanics was minimized with self-ligating brackets.     

A prospective randomized split-mouth study on pain experience during chairside archwire manipulation in self-ligating and conventional brackets

Objective:To investigate patient discomfort during archwire engagement and disengagement in patients treated with self-ligating and conventional brackets using a split-mouth design.Materials and Methods:Eighteen consecutive patients (15 female, 3 male; age: 22.2 ± 6.4 years) who requested treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances were randomly assigned for bonding with SmartClip self-ligating brackets on one side of the dentition and conventional standard edgewise brackets on the other. During the course of treatment, patients rated the discomfort experienced during every archwire engagement and disengagement using a numeric rating scale. Results were evaluated for round and rectangular nickel titanium and rectangular stainless steel, titanium molybdenum, and Elgiloy archwires. Patients also rated their overall experience retrospectively for both bracket systems.Results:Regardless of archwire type, disengagement was rated as being significantly more painful on the SmartClip side (P  =  .027). For rigid, rectangular archwires, engagement and disengagement were rated as being significantly more painful on the SmartClip side (P  =  .031; P  =  .004). Retrospective ratings favored conventional brackets beyond ratings recorded during treatment.Conclusion:Engagement and disengagement of rigid rectangular archwires caused more pain with SmartClip self-ligating brackets than with conventional ones. Careful archwire manipulation and patience during full alignment are essential for limiting chairside pain. Low pain levels will help ensure treatment satisfaction and compliance.     

Effects of different bleaching methods on shear bond strengths of orthodontic brackets

Objective:To evaluate the effects of different bleaching methods on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets.Materials and Methods:Forty-five freshly extracted premolars were randomly divided into three groups (n  =  15 per group). In group I, bleaching was performed with the office bleaching method. In group II, bleaching was performed with the home bleaching method. Group III served as the control. Orthodontic brackets were bonded with a light cure composite resin and cured with an LED light. After bonding, the SBS of the brackets were tested with a Universal testing machine.Results:Analysis of variance indicated a significant difference between groups (P < .001). The highest values for SBS were measured in group III (20.99 ± 2.32 MPa). The SBS was significantly lower in groups I and II than in group III (P < .001). The lowest values for SBS were measured in group II (6.42 ± 0.81 MPa). SBS was significantly higher in group I than in group II (P < .001).Conclusions:Both of the bleaching methods significantly affected the SBS of orthodontic brackets on human enamel. Bleaching with the home bleaching method affected SBS more adversely than did bleaching with the office bleaching method.     

Self-ligating vs conventional brackets as perceived by orthodontists

Objective:To determine if there are significant clinical differences between self-ligating brackets (SLB) and conventional brackets (CB) during orthodontic treatment, as perceived by orthodontists.Materials and Methods:A survey was developed and distributed to evaluate how SLB compare to CB in terms of orthodontists'' perceptions (n  =  430).Results:SLB were preferred during the initial stage of treatment based on the shorter adjustment appointments and faster initial treatment progress they provided (P < .0001). On the other hand, practitioners preferred CB during the finishing and detailing stages of treatment (P < .0001). CB were also preferred over SLB because they were cheaper and resulted in fewer emergency appointments.Conclusions:The orthodontists'' preference was significantly influenced by (1) the proportion of patients treated with SLB (P < .0001), (2) the number of cases it took them to become accustomed to SLB (P < .0001), and (3) the average appointment intervals associated with SLB (P < .0001).     

自锁托槽对关闭拔牙间隙阶段滑动阻力的影响

目的 比较在牙齿关闭拔牙间隙过程中不同自锁托槽和传统托槽与不锈钢丝组合所产生的滑动阻力。方法 在干燥环境下,分别选择2种自锁托槽(被动Damon^®和主动Tomy^®)和传统托槽的2种结扎方式(橡皮结扎圈和结扎丝)与0.019×0.025英寸不锈钢丝组合,测量严重牙列拥挤患者在拔牙后排齐整平的下颌模型上关闭拔牙间隙阶段的滑动阻力。采用方差分析的方法对各项测量数据进行统计学处理。结果 在关闭拔牙间隙阶段,不同托槽组合、组间的滑动阻力的差异均具有显著的统计学意义(P<0.01),最大静摩擦力和滑动摩擦力由小到大依次为被动Damon组<主动Tomy组<结扎丝结扎组<结扎圈结扎组。结论 在关闭拔牙间隙阶段,被动自锁托槽的滑动阻力明显小于主动自锁托槽的滑动阻力,自锁托槽的滑动阻力明显小于传统托槽的滑动阻力。     

In vitro evaluation of microbial contamination of orthodontic brackets as received from the manufacturer using microbiological and molecular tests

Objective:To test the null hypothesis that orthodontic brackets as supplied by manufacturers do not have microbial contamination.Materials and Methods:The sample comprised 140 brackets of four different commercially available brands, used directly from the manufacturer''s packaging, divided into 14 groups (n  =  10 brackets each). Of the 140 pieces, 60 were full cases and 80 were replacement brackets. Materials were tested to detect bacterial growth, analyze types of bacteria present (biochemical test), and identify bacteria (molecular test with polymerase chain reaction [PCR]).Results:In two of 12 groups the brackets showed microbial contamination: group 1, Morelli full case brackets, and group 12, Abzil-3M Unitek replacement brackets. Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis were the bacteria identified in groups 1 and 12, respectively (suggested by the biochemical test and confirmed by PCR).Conclusions:Brackets of two brands (Morelli and Abzil-3M Unitek) were found to be contaminated by bacteria in the original packages supplied by the manufacturers, which suggests a risk for patient contamination. These data suggest that the manufacturers of these materials should improve the quality control of the packaging used, including sterilization, for the security of patient health.     

Clinical bond failure rates of adhesive precoated self-ligating brackets using a self-etching primer

Objective:To comparatively assess the failure rate of adhesive precoated (APC) self-ligating metal brackets bonded with two different enamel surface preparation techniques: self-etching primer (SEP) and conventional two-step etch and primer method (CM).Materials and Methods:Fifty-seven patients with complete permanent dentition were included in this study. A total of 1140 APC self-ligating brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) were bonded using a split-mouth design. For each patient, SEP (Transbond Plus SEP, 3M Unitek) and CM (37% phosphoric acid) were used in alternate quadrants. All brackets were bonded by the same investigator after pumicing and rinsing of all of the teeth. The number, site, and date of first-time bracket failures were monitored throughout orthodontic treatment (mean, 22 months). The survival rates of the brackets were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests (P < .05). The adhesive remnant index was used to determine the bond failure interface.Results:The bond failure rates were 2.97% and 2.18% for the CM and SEP, respectively. No statistically significant difference in failure rates was found between the groups. The bond failure sites were predominantly at the enamel-adhesive interface in both groups.Conclusion:This long-term in vivo study showed that the combined use of SEP and the APC bracket system can be used effectively for bonding brackets after pumicing the enamel surfaces in clinical orthodontics.     

Treatment time,outcome, and anchorage loss comparisons of self-ligating and conventional brackets

Objective:To compare the treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss among orthodontic patients treated by self-ligating brackets (SLBs) and conventional brackets (CBs).Materials and Methods:A retrospective cohort study compared 34 patients (SLB group) treated by SmartClip brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) to 35 patients (CB group) treated by conventional preadjusted Victory series brackets (3M Unitek) and ligated by stainless steel wire ligatures. Pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) lateral cephalograms were traced and analyzed using Pancherz sagittal-occlusion analysis to obtain skeletal and dental changes in the maxilla and the mandible. The dental cast models were assessed by the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index for the treatment outcomes.Results:The mean treatment time for SLBs (19.19 months) did not show a statistically significant difference from 21.25 months of CBs; the treatment time and pretreatment PAR scores were strongly correlated. There was no difference in anchorage loss between the SLB and CB groups. There were significant dental and skeletal changes among adolescent orthodontic patients regardless of the bracket used. The lingual inclination of the mandibular incisors in the CB group was 3.62° more than in the SLB group (P < .01).Conclusions:The treatment time and anchorage loss are not influenced by the type of bracket used. There are significant dental and skeletal changes among adolescent orthodontic patients regardless of the bracket used. There is significantly greater lingual inclination of mandibular incisors in the CB group than in the SLB group.     

Orthodontic bracket bonding without previous adhesive priming: A meta-regression analysis

Objective:To determine the consensus among studies that adhesive resin application improves the bond strength of orthodontic brackets and the association of methodological variables on the influence of bond strength outcome.Materials and Methods:In vitro studies were selected to answer whether adhesive resin application increases the immediate shear bond strength of metal orthodontic brackets bonded with a photo-cured orthodontic adhesive. Studies included were those comparing a group having adhesive resin to a group without adhesive resin with the primary outcome measurement shear bond strength in MPa. A systematic electronic search was performed in PubMed and Scopus databases.Results:Nine studies were included in the analysis. Based on the pooled data and due to a high heterogeneity among studies (I²  =  93.3), a meta-regression analysis was conducted. The analysis demonstrated that five experimental conditions explained 86.1% of heterogeneity and four of them had significantly affected in vitro shear bond testing. The shear bond strength of metal brackets was not significantly affected when bonded with adhesive resin, when compared to those without adhesive resin.Conclusions:The adhesive resin application can be set aside during metal bracket bonding to enamel regardless of the type of orthodontic adhesive used.     

Effects of third-order torque on frictional force of self-ligating brackets

Objective:To investigate the effects of third-order torque on frictional properties of self-ligating brackets (SLBs).Materials and Methods:Three SLBs (two passive and one active) and three archwires (0.016 × 0.022-inch nickel-titanium, and 0.017 × 0.025-inch and 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel) were used. Static friction was measured by drawing archwires though bracket slots with four torque levels (0°, 10°, 20°, 30°), using a mechanical testing machine (n  =  10). A conventional stainless-steel bracket was used for comparison. Results were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Contact between the bracket and wire was studied using a scanning electron microscope.Results:In most bracket-wire combinations, increasing the torque produced a significant increase in static friction. Most SLB-wire combinations at all torques produced less friction than that from the conventional bracket. Active-type SLB-wire combinations showed higher friction than that from passive-type SLB-wire combinations in most conditions. When increasing the torque, more contact between the wall of a bracket slot and the edge of a wire was observed for all bracket types.Conclusions:Increasing torque when using SLBs causes an increase in friction, since contact between the bracket slot wall and the wire edge becomes greater; the design of brackets influences static friction.     

Effects of remineralization procedures on shear bond strengths of brackets bonded to demineralized enamel surfaces with self-etch systems

Objective:To compare the effects of different remineralization procedures on the surface roughness of teeth, shear bond strengths (SBSs), and Adhesive Remnant Index scores of self-etching primer (SEP) used to bond orthodontic brackets to previously treated demineralized enamel surfaces.Materials and Methods:A total of 140 extracted human premolar teeth were randomly divided into seven equal groups. Group I was the control group. A demineralization procedure was performed in the other six groups. A remineralization procedure was performed before bonding by using casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate, fluoride, a microabrasion mixture (18% hydrochloric acid-fine pumice), a microabrasion agent, and resin infiltration in groups III to VII. Brackets were bonded using a self-etching primer/adhesive system. The specimens were tested for SBS. The roughness and morphology of the enamel surfaces were analyzed using profilometer and scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance, Tukey, and G-tests at the α  =  .05 level.Results:Significant differences were found in the SBS values among the seven groups (F  =  32.69, P  =  .003). The lowest SBS value was found in group II (2.62 ± 1.46 MPa). No significant differences were found between groups I, III, and VII, between groups III and IV, or between groups V and VI. The differences in the roughness values were statistically significant among the groups (P  =  .002).Conclusions:Remineralization procedures restore the decreased SBS of orthodontic brackets and decrease surface roughness caused by enamel demineralization. SEPs provide clinically acceptable SBS values for bonding orthodontic brackets to previously treated demineralized enamel surfaces.     

Role of lubricants on friction between self-ligating brackets and archwires

Objective:To evaluate the effect of different lubricants on friction between orthodontic brackets and archwires.Materials and Methods:Active (Quick, Forestadent) and passive (Damon 3MX, Ormco) self-ligating brackets underwent friction tests in the presence of mucin- and carboxymethylcellulose (CMC)–based artificial saliva, distilled water, and whole human saliva (positive control). Dry friction (no lubricant) was used as the negative control. Bracket/wire samples (0.014 × 0.025 inch, CuNiTi, SDS Ormco) underwent friction tests eight times in a universal testing machine.Results:Two-way analysis of variance showed no significant interaction between bracket type and lubricant (P  =  .324). Friction force obtained with passive self-ligating brackets was lower than that for active brackets (P < .001). Friction observed in the presence of artificial saliva did not differ from that generated under lubrication with natural human saliva, as shown by Tukey test. Higher friction forces were found with the use of distilled water or when the test was performed under dry condition (ie, with no lubricant).Conclusion:Lubrication plays a role in friction forces between self-ligating brackets and CuNiTi wires, with mucin- and CMC-based artificial saliva providing a reliable alternative to human natural saliva.     

Caries Risk Factors in Children under Treatment with Sectional Brackets

Objective:To longitudinally investigate the caries risk levels in children undergoing orthodontic treatment with sectional brackets.Materials and Methods:A total of 42 children scheduled for orthodontic treatment with sectional orthodontic appliances participated in this study. They were divided into two groups based on decayed, missing, and filled permanent and deciduous teeth (DMFT/dmft) scores and counts of mutans streptococci (MS) prior to treatment. One was the low caries risk group (n  =  26) and the other was the high caries risk group (n  =  16). Paraffin-stimulated whole saliva was collected for examination of salivary flow rate, buffer capacity, and MS and lactobacilli (LB) levels before treatment, 2 and 4 months after appliance placement, and 2, 4, and 8 months after appliance removal.Results:The pretreatment salivary flow rates, buffer capacity, and MS levels remained statistically unchanged during and after active orthodontic treatment in both groups. The levels of LB in the high caries risk group were significantly elevated by appliance placement, but upon appliance removal started to fall significantly and came a little short of the pretreatment levels. In the low caries risk group, the pretreatment levels of LB remained statistically unchanged during and after treatment. There were no significant differences in salivary flow rate or buffer capacity, but there were significant differences in MS and LB scores between the two groups at every measurement time.Conclusions:In children undergoing orthodontic treatment with sectional brackets, LB levels are an important part in making caries risk assessment.     

Suitability of orthodontic brackets for rebonding and reworking following removal by air pressure pulses and conventional debracketing techniques

Aim:To test the null hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the reusability of debonded brackets with regard to debonding technique and adhesive used.Method:Ninety-six osteotomed third molars were randomly assigned to two study groups (n  =  48) for bonding of a 0.018-inch bracket (Ormesh, Ormco) with either a composite adhesive (Mono-Lok2; RMO) or a glass ionomer cement (GIC; Fuji Ortho LC;GC). Each of these two groups were then randomly divided into four subgroups (n  =  12) according to the method of debonding using (1) bracket removal pliers (BRP; Dentaurum), (2) a side cutter (SC; Dentaurum), (3) a lift-off debracketing instrument (LODI; 3M-Unitek), or (4) an air pressure pulse device (CoronaFlex; KaVo). The brackets were subsequently assessed visually for reusability and reworkability with 2× magnification and by pull testing with a 0.017- × 0.025-inch steel archwire. The proportions of reusable brackets were individually compared in terms of mode of removal and with regard to adhesives using the Fisher exact test (α  =  5%).Results:The null hypothesis was rejected. Not taking into account the debonding method, brackets bonded with GIC were judged to a significant extent (81%; n  =  39; P < .01) to be reworkable compared with those bonded with composite (56%; n  =  27). All brackets in both adhesive groups removed with either the LODI or the CoronaFlex were found to be reusable, whereas 79% (46%) of the brackets removed with the BRP (SC) were not. The proportion of reusable brackets differed significantly between modes of removal (P < .01).Conclusion:With regard to bracket reusability, the SC and the BRP cannot be recommended for debonding brackets, especially in combination with a composite adhesive.     

自锁托槽与传统托槽矫治器对牙周健康影响的比较研究

目的 对比戴用自锁托槽与传统托槽矫治器后牙周指数的变化.材料和方法选取12～18岁正畸患者80例,按矫治器类型分为两组：实验组,40例采用AO公司生产的T3自锁托槽矫正的患者;对照组,采用杭州西湖公司生产的徐氏托槽矫正的患者40例.由同一牙周专科医师分别检测80例患者治疗前和治疗6个月的各项牙周指数（GI,PLI,SBI,PD）.结果 治疗6个月后两组间牙周指数（GI,PLI,SBI,PD）差异无显著性.结论 自锁托槽矫治器不会更有利于牙周组织的健康,牙周的健康状况取决于患者的口腔卫生状况.