POLYMERS & APPLICATIONS FOR ORTHODONTIC ALIGNERS Flashcards
Orthodontic Archwires: Ideal Properties
(5)
a. High strength
b. Low stiffness
c. High elastic range
d. High formability
e. Weld or solder
Tooth movement during wire unloading or recovery
Tooth movement related to elastic strain recovery during wire unloading
Archwire inserted.
Elastic strain in archwire.
Archwire elastic strain
recovery moves teeth to
original shape of archwire.
Property & functional relationship - stage of treatment
a. More crowding initial stage:
b. Final stage—fine adjustments:
c. Similar stiffness considerations when using —
low stiffness, higher
resilience
high stiffness
aligners
- Stainless Steel
a. Advantages
(1)
c. Disadvantages
(3)
1) Lowest cost; Excellent formability
1) High stiffness: high E modulus = 168-180 GPa; Highest force delivery
2) Require frequent adjustments (not low continuous force delivery)
3) Corrosion susceptibility
- Beta Titanium
a. Advantages
(1)
b. Disadvantages
(2)
1) Intermediate stiffness: E modulus = ~65 GPa;
Intermediate delivery force
1) Expensive
2) Higher bracket friction
- Nickel-Titanium (NiTi)
a. Ni: 55%; Ti: 45%
b. Advantages
(2)
c. Disadvantages
(3)
1) Lowest stiffness: E modulus = ~35 GPa; Lowest force delivery
2) Low continuous unloading force at varying deflection, less frequent
adjustments
1) Expensive
2) Second highest bracket friction
3) Lowest in vivo corrosion resistance (Ni release
Orthodontic Aligner Therapy Background
1. 1946: Clear orthodontic appliance concept first introduced
(Kesling HD, Am J Orthod Oral Surg, 1946)
2. 1998: Align Technology released Invisalign
3. Appropriate case selection important component for success
4. Incremental movement of teeth using a series of aligners
5. Tooth movement typically no more than — at one time
a. Why —?
6. More complex case, more aligners, more time to completion
0.2mm
- Treatment effectiveness
a. Aligner therapy and conventional fixed orthodontics are both
effective overall.
b. However, conventional fixed (braces/archwires) more effective
to produce adequate (3) (Ye et al 2019) - Similar biomechanical process to wires, aligner is under load when placed onto misaligned teeth
a. Teeth move during — recovery of the polymer
occlusal contracts, control tooth torque,
and retention.
elastic strain
Tooth movement related to elastic strain recovery during wire or aligner
strain recovery
Aligner inserted
Elastic strain in aligner
Series of aligners
* Elastic strain recovery moves teeth
to ~original shape of each aligner
* Incremental movement with each
aligner that is worn ~1 wk
Based on ADA survey of general dentists (n=373 responses) :
a. –% of responding GDs provide orthodontic care
1) –% used clear aligner therapy
2) –% used fixed orthodontic appliances
b. –% reported increasing orthodontic care provided over last
5 years
42
96
28
61
c. 2 most important factors considered whether to treat or refer:
1) Case complexity (41%)
2) Patient age (21%)
Aligner therapy treatment management comparison
between orthodontists and general dentists
Based on survey responses from 374/1000 orthodontists and
229/1000 general dentists:
a. Both groups reported confidence using aligner therapy
b. Orthodontists more likely to use additional techniques
such as elastics, extractions, and combination of fixed
and aligner therapy
c. Ortho more likely to tell patient their malocclusion was
too complex for — therapy
aligner
Thermoplastic polymer sheets
1. Polymer component options:
(6)
- Polyurethane (PU)
- Polypropylene (PP)
- Polycarbonate (PC)
- Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
- Polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG)
For comparison, monomer/polymer components of restorative
composites:
Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, TEGDMA, UDMA, HEMA
(2)
a. Methacrylate-based (MA) monomers that form a polymer resin network via
polymerization reaction, not heat-forming
b. Polymer resin network with fillers, i.e. ‘composite’ not a polymer only
nvisalign thermoplastic polymers:
first material
1. Align 1 st material:
- Modifications:
single layer polyurethane (Exceed-30, EXE30)
multilayer polyurethane/copolyester (SmartTrack, LD30)
a. Increased flexibility (more elastic)
b. More constant forces
c. Based on peer assessment rating (PAR) score:
no difference in clinical outcomes between the 2 materials