Background: Adhesive systems are important for achieving reliable and durable bracket bonding in orthodontic treatments. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of a new one-step orthodontic bonding system that combines the primer and adhesive solutions. Methods: In this study, four groups were formed, each consisting of 20 first premolar teeth. Acid etching was applied to all teeth for 30 s, except in Group II. Group I included teeth where a single layer of primer was applied using the Transbond XT system before bracket bonding. Group II consisted of teeth bonded with brackets after using a self-etching primer with the Transbond XT system. Group III used GC Ortho Connect, a single-step adhesive that incorporates the primer within the adhesive itself. Group IV, a single layer of primer was applied before bonding with GC Ortho Connect. Shear bond strength (SBS) was assessed using one-way ANOVA and the Tukey-HSD test, while Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) scores were analyzed using the Chi-square test at a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: SBS measurements were recorded as 13.28 ± 2.15 MPa for Group I, 11.06 ± 2.26 MPa for Group II, 10.37 ± 1.92 MPa for Group III, and 16.02 ± 2.17 MPa for Group IV. Statistical analysis using the Tukey test revealed significant differences in SBS values between Groups II and IV, as well as Groups III and IV (p < 0.05). All groups showed clinically acceptable bond strength, with Group IV demonstrating superior adhesion. Additionally, the chi-square test indicated a statistically significant variation in the ARI scores across all four groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The adhesive performance of the one-step GC Ortho Connect system is clinically comparable to Transbond XT. However, primer application is necessary to achieve optimal bond strength.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate impacted mandibular canines and adjacent dentoalveolar structures using cone beam computed tomography. Methods: Measurements were made on CBCT images of 54 impacted mandibular canines. Parameters such as the position of the canine teeth, follicle diameter, their relationship with the mental foramen and the incisive mandibular canal, resorption in the adjacent teeth, interpremolar and intermolar width, arch symmetry, and mesiodistal width of the canine teeth were investigated. Results: The resorption rate in adjacent permanent teeth was recorded as 14.8%. No statistically significant difference was found between the follicle size of the canine tooth and the resorption in the adjacent teeth (p > 0.05). Cortical bone perforation was found in 83.3% of individuals with impacted mandibular canines. Teeth in contact with the mental foramen and incisive mandibular canal were found in 11.1% and 6.5%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the interpremolar and intermolar width on the impacted and non-impacted sides (p > 0.05). However, a significant difference was observed in the mesiodistal width of the canines and arch length on the impacted and non-impacted sides (p < 0.05). Conclusions: No correlation was found between root resorption in adjacent teeth and follicle size. Cortical bone perforations were observed in most impacted canines, and some were in contact with the mental foramen and the incisive mandibular canal. Although transversal arch widths were similar on the impacted and non-impacted sides, differences in arch length and mesiodistal widths may affect arch symmetry and should be considered in treatment planning.

To evaluate the extent of root resorption associated with treatment using acrylic cap splint rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type rapid maxillary e

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the bone area in the posterior region, which is important for mandibular molar distalization in skeletal Class I and Class III individuals with normodivergent and hyperdivergent vertical growth patterns. Materials and Methods In this study, cone-beam computed tomography scans of 120 individuals divided into 4 groups as Class I normodivergent (Group-I), Class I hyperdivergent (Group-II), Class III normodivergent (Group-III) and Class III hyperdivergent (Group-IV). Retromolar space at crown level measurements were performed on CBCT-derived panoramic radiographs and axial sections. Retromolar space at the root level was measured 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, 8mm and 10mm apical to cemento-enamel junction at CBCT axial sections. Results Retromolar space decreased towards the root apex in all groups and smallest retromolar space was level of CEJ_10mm in all groups. At any root level, the distal root of the mandibular second molar tooth was in contact with the mandibular inner or outer lingual cortex; 50% in Group-I, 46.7% in Group-II, 7% in Group-III and 7% in Group-IV. Conclusions In normodivergent individuals, the retromolar area length at the root level is observed to be higher in Class III than in Class I at almost every level. In hyperdivergent individuals, on the other hand, only at CEJ₁₀ level, it is higher in length in Class III than in Class I. Vertical growth pattern has no effect on the root and crown level retromolar space in Class I and Class III individuals. Clinical Relevance CBCT provides more useful information than panoramic radiographs for patients who are scheduled for large mandibular molar distalization

This study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of sliding mechanics of mandibular molar mesialization with different force application models using finite element analysis. Four models were created to simulate different force applications: force applied from the miniscrew to the second molar hook (Model 1), force applied from the miniscrew to an extended lever arm reaching the center of resistance of the second molar (Model 2), force applied to the second molar hook with indirect anchorage (Model 3), and force applied to the second molar hook with dental anchorage (Model 4). Maximum and minimum principal stresses in the tooth, alveolar bone, and around the miniscrew; Von Mises stress distribution; and tooth displacement patterns were analyzed separately for each model. In Model 1, mesial tipping of the molar was observed with concentrated stresses around the molar and miniscrew. Model 2 demonstrated a near-parallel displacement tendency of the second molar with more evenly distributed stresses. Models 3 and 4 showed similar tipping and mesialization of the molar but differed in stress and strain patterns. Applying force via an extended lever arm directed toward the tooth’s center of resistance produced a more parallel initial displacement of the second molar together with a more balanced stress distribution. Within the limits of an initial, linear-static analysis, miniscrew anchorage reduced the stress and strain transmitted to the adjacent teeth compared with dental anchorage.